data_profile

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds valuable behavioral details: sample-based row counting for large CSVs ('sampled at 100k'), and a data privacy guarantee ('nothing leaves it'). These go beyond the annotation, disclosing performance and security behavior.

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 front-load the core purpose, then provide workflow and privacy context. Every sentence adds value without redundancy or wasted words.

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 single-parameter, read-only tool, the description is remarkably complete: it states the operation, the file types, the exact output contents, a sampling caveat, and the local-only/privacy behavior. No output schema exists, but the description enumerates what will be returned, so the agent knows what to expect.

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?

The schema has one parameter, path, with 0% description coverage. The description partially compensates by indicating the path refers to a local data file and listing supported formats, but it does not elaborate on path format, valid values, or error conditions. Since the parameter is single and arguably self-explanatory, the compensation is adequate but not thorough.

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 'Describe a data file' with specific formats (csv/tsv/parquet/xlsx/json) and the output content (row count, dtypes, head, numeric summary). It also distinguishes from sibling tools like data_load by explicitly positioning it 'BEFORE plotting' and outlining a workflow: Profile → design the chart → load.

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 explicit usage context: 'BEFORE plotting it' and the workflow sequence 'Profile → design the chart → load', which tells the agent when this tool should be used relative to other steps. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the workflow implies its placement.

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