Resolve Asset Selection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states it is read-only, does not launch a run, and does not filter external/observable/non-executable/partitioned matches. However, it does not state authentication requirements, rate limits, or potential side effects beyond no launch.

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?

The description is front-loaded with purpose, followed by a structured syntax list and return information. It is appropriately sized for a complex syntax tool, though the syntax examples could be slightly condensed.

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 tool's complexity (syntax parsing) and that an output schema exists, the description is nearly complete: it explains syntax, return format, and read-only behavior. It misses guidance on the 'env' parameter and explicit when-to-use vs alternatives, but covers the core resolution behavior well.

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 description coverage is 0%, so parameters are undocumented. The description provides extensive detail about the supported syntax for 'asset_selection', but does not explain the 'env' parameter or the expected format for asset_selection's top-level structure beyond syntax examples. This partially compensates but leaves the env parameter ambiguous.

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?

States a specific verb (resolve), resource (Dagster asset-selection syntax into concrete assets), and explicitly distinguishes from launching a run. This clearly differentiates it from 'search_assets' and other read-only tools in the sibling list.

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: it resolves syntax without launching a run and its output is ready to pass to materialize_assets or backfill_assets. However, it does not explicitly name when to use this vs search_assets or how it differs from listing assets via get_asset_details.

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