mcp_preview_data

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states it 'gets a preview' without disclosing behavioral traits like whether it's read-only, potential performance impacts, authentication needs, or rate limits. It lacks details on what 'preview' entails (e.g., sample rows, limited columns) beyond the schema's limit parameter.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Get a preview of data') and adds key detail ('with optional filters'). There's no wasted wording, making it appropriately sized and easy to parse.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool with 3 parameters and potential complexity. It doesn't explain return values, error handling, or how 'preview' differs from full queries, leaving gaps in understanding the tool's behavior and output.

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 schema fully documents parameters like 'table_name' and 'filters'. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'optional filters' but doesn't elaborate on semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as filter syntax examples or preview-specific constraints.

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 action ('Get a preview') and resource ('data from a SQL Server table'), specifying it's for previewing with optional filters. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'mcp_get_sample_values' or 'mcp_quick_data_analysis', which might offer similar data retrieval functions.

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 mentions 'optional filters' but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'mcp_execute_query' for more complex queries or 'mcp_get_sample_values' for sampling. There's no explicit when/when-not usage context or sibling differentiation.

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