get_sample_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only preview operation ('Preview'), but does not disclose behavioral traits such as idempotency, authentication requirements, or error handling. The description is minimal but not misleading.

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: two sentences and a one-line usage directive. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy. Front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose and usage but lacks parameter details. It does not explain what the preview returns (e.g., column types, row format). However, given the tool's simplicity, it is minimally adequate.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining parameters. It only mentions 'first N rows' correlating to the 'limit' parameter, but does not describe 'datasource_name', 'database', 'table', or 'schema'. The required parameters are self-explanatory, but the description adds no semantic value beyond the schema.

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 'Preview first N rows of a table', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_tables, get_table_schema, and run_sample_check by emphasizing verification and preview before expensive checks.

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 explicitly says 'USE: To VERIFY you found the correct table before running expensive checks. Show user what data looks like.' This provides clear when-to-use guidance, though it does not name alternative tools for the expensive checks.

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