datahub_events_csv_file

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description adds behavioral details beyond annotations: latency (up to 15 minutes), file format constraints (CSV, ZIP, GZ), and max file size (30 MB). It does not contradict annotations. The destructive hint is appropriately supported by the 'Ingest' action. However, it does not clarify authorization needs or what exactly gets modified.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two concise sentences with front-loaded purpose. No wasted words. The first sentence covers the core action, and the second adds essential constraints and latency info.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with no output schema, the description does not mention what the response or return value is (e.g., success confirmation). It covers the main use case, constraints, and latency, but lacks details on error handling or result format. Given the simplicity, it's adequate but not fully complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already describes all parameters. The description adds no new information about parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema. According to the rule, baseline is 3 when schema coverage is high.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool ingests third-party data via CSV file. The verb 'Ingest' and 'Sends' with resource 'events to DataHub' are specific. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from its sibling 'send_datahub_events', which likely serves a similar purpose but perhaps with different input format.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for sending batch CSV data but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'send_datahub_events' or 'delete_datahub_events_by_filter'. It mentions a latency of 15 minutes but no exclusions or prerequisites.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.