overture_schema

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description adds genuinely useful context beyond them: it reads Parquet metadata rather than feature rows, signalling a cheap metadata call rather than a data fetch.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and then the pairing hint. Very little waste, though the trailing whitespace/newline formatting is a minor blemish.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described. The key behavioral fact (metadata, not rows) is stated, and usage context is given; only the undocumented release parameter limits completeness.

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%, so the description must carry the load. Its 'theme/type' phrasing maps to the two required parameters (theme, feature_type), but the optional release parameter is never mentioned, leaving one of three params undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: inspect dataset columns for a theme/feature_type. It distinguishes itself from data-reading siblings by scoping to column metadata prior to filtering or grouping. It doesn't explicitly name which sibling it contrasts with, but the scope is clear.

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?

Gives a clear when-to-use: before filtering or grouping, and directs the agent to pair it with overture_catalog. No explicit when-not or alternative is named, so it falls just short of the top band.

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