inspect_d3plot_database

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that it avoids launching LS-PrePost and may use optional LASSO, but it does not describe permissions, performance implications, what happens if LASSO is unavailable, or whether the read is purely local. This is meaningful but incomplete behavioral context.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. However, the phrase "through optional LASSO" is underspecified enough that it slightly obscures rather than clarifies the action.

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 a d3plot database inspection tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description omits what metadata is returned, what LASSO represents, and how the tool behaves without it. It is not complete enough for an agent to invoke it confidently on a d3plot file without additional assumptions.

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% and the single required `path` parameter receives no explanation in the description. The description does not clarify accepted file formats, whether `path` points to a directory or file, or any syntax expectations, leaving the agent to infer everything from the parameter name alone.

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 states a verb ("Read") and a resource ("file metadata"), but does not specify what metadata is exposed for a d3plot database, nor does it distinguish this tool from siblings like inspect_d3plot_scl or inspect_lsreader. The phrase "through optional LASSO" is cryptic and adds ambiguity rather than specificity.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as inspect_d3plot_scl, inspect_lsreader, or inspect_binout. The mention of "optional LASSO" hints at a mode but does not explain when that mode applies or when to choose a different inspection tool.

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