inspect_target_schema

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. It discloses it inspects only the first sheet of Excel, but does not mention any side effects or permissions. With no annotations, this is adequate but minimal.

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?

Single sentence, 10 words, no filler. Front-loaded with verb and resource. Every word earns its place.

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 only 1 parameter, no annotations, but with an output schema (which presumably explains return value), the description is nearly complete. Could add that it returns field names and types, but output schema likely covers that.

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%, yet description adds no meaning to the 'target_source' parameter. The description only mentions 'target Excel datasource' but does not explain what 'target_source' is or how to specify it.

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?

Description states verb 'inspect' and resource 'first-sheet schema of a target Excel datasource'. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'intake_datasource_schema' by specifying Excel and first-sheet scope.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. However, from context it's implied to inspect schema before using other datasource tools. No alternatives mentioned.

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