lc_preview_set_external_adapter

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It indicates 'preview' but does not explicitly confirm that no side effects occur (e.g., simulated dry run). Missing details on validation behavior, error conditions, or return value nature.

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 a single sentence of 11 words, which is too brief for a tool with 10 parameters and no annotations. It sacrifices essential information for brevity, resulting in under-specification.

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 (10 params, no annotations, no output schema), the description is woefully incomplete. It fails to explain what an external adapter is, how preview differs from actual set, or what the response contains.

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%, and the tool description does not explain any of the 10 parameters (oid, name, data, etc.). The agent must infer meanings from names alone, which is insufficient given the complexity and lack of enums.

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 previews creating or updating an external adapter Hive record. The verb 'preview' and resource 'external adapter' are specific, and the action 'creating or updating' is explicit. However, it does not distinguish from sibling preview tools for other resources, but the resource name provides differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like lc_preview_set_external_adapter_enabled or the actual set operation. There is no mention of prerequisites, context for use, or exclusions.

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