resolve_asset_selection

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

With no annotations, description fully discloses behavior: read-only, does not filter external/observable/non-executable/partitioned matches, and returns asset_keys plus summaries. No contradictions.

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?

Description is moderately long but well-structured with clear bullet points listing syntax options. All information is relevant, though some details on output format could be condensed. No fluff.

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?

Given the complexity of syntax resolution and existing output schema, the description covers input syntax, output format, and read-only nature. Missing env parameter documentation slightly reduces completeness, but core functionality is well-described.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It thoroughly explains the asset_selection syntax (key predicates, wildcards, operators), but completely omits the env parameter. While the primary parameter is well-covered, ignoring a parameter reduces the score.

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?

Description clearly states the tool resolves asset-selection syntax into concrete assets without launching a run. The verb 'resolve' and specific resource 'asset-selection syntax' distinguish it from sibling tools like list_jobs or get_asset_details.

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?

Description indicates the tool is for resolving selection syntax for use with materialize_assets or backfill_assets, and states it is read-only. Provides clear context but does not explicitly list when not to use or alternatives.

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