profile_twb_for_migration

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 states the tool profiles datasources and worksheet scope, implying it is a read-only analysis tool. However, it does not disclose side effects, authentication needs, or whether it modifies the workbook. The term 'profile' suggests no destructive action, but this is implicit.

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 concise (one sentence) and front-loaded with the verb and resource. It is appropriately sized, but could benefit from a brief mention of parameters or output without becoming verbose.

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 the tool's complexity (3 parameters, output schema exists, and multiple sibling tools), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the core purpose but lacks detail on parameters and usage context. The presence of an output schema somewhat mitigates the need to describe return values.

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 0%, meaning no parameter descriptions exist in the schema. The description does not explain what 'file_path', 'scope', or 'target_source' mean or how they affect behavior. The parameter names are self-explanatory to some extent, but the description fails to add semantic value beyond their names.

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 'Profile workbook datasources and worksheet scope before migration' clearly identifies the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('profile') and resource ('workbook datasources and worksheet scope'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'analyze_twb' and 'migrate_twb_guided' by focusing on pre-migration profiling.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'analyze_twb' or 'preview_twb_migration'. It does not mention prerequisites or conditions that would trigger its use, leaving the agent to infer from the tool name alone.

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