preview_data

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

With no annotations, the description takes on full burden, disclosing n capped at 100, mode options (head/tail/sample), and purpose. No side effects mentioned but likely none; adequate transparency.

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, front-loaded sentences with no fluff; every word adds value.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, the description covers usage, parameters, and context adequately. Could mention return format explicitly but already covered.

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% but description explains n (number of rows, capped at 100) and mode (with defaults and options), adding meaning beyond raw schema types. Path is implicit but clear.

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 peeks at actual rows of a data file, distinguishing it from siblings like column_stats or profile_dataset by emphasizing real values instead of statistics.

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?

It explains when to use (to see real example values for formatting, encodings, etc.) but does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, though context is clear.

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