get_data_sample

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the tool gets a formatted text sample, without disclosing safety, side effects, or any behavioral traits. There is no mention of read-only nature, auth needs, or potential impact.

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 extremely concise with two sentences. The first sentence precisely defines the action and result, and the second adds useful context. No redundant words or 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 tool has 4 parameters (all documented in schema) and an output schema exists, the description provides a decent overview. However, it lacks behavioral and usage guidance, leaving some gaps for the agent to fully understand when and how to invoke this tool correctly.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. It mentions 'formatted text' which relates to output, not parameters.

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 verb 'get' and the resource 'sample of rows from a dataset as formatted text', providing a specific action and outcome. It also gives a use case, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'data_quality_report' or 'analyze_data'.

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 providing data context or quick inspection, but it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use this tool (e.g., for statistical analysis) or references to alternative sibling tools. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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