get_data_source

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It indicates the tool is a read operation and describes the output shape. However, it omits error conditions (e.g., data source not found), authentication needs, or any side effects, leaving gaps in transparency.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second describes the output. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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?

The tool is a simple getter, but the description lacks parameter details and error behavior. While it provides output shape and comparison to siblings, it does not fully compensate for missing schema descriptions or output schema, leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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?

The input schema has two parameters (name, path) with no descriptions (0% coverage). The description does not explain what these parameters represent or how to use them, adding minimal value. For a tool with two undocumented parameters, this is insufficient.

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 it is a 'Single-DataSource read-back' and explicitly compares to similar getter tools, distinguishing its purpose. It also specifies the output shape, making it easy to understand what the tool does.

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 implies usage by comparison to similar getters ('parity with get_textbox / get_image / get_rectangle / get_chart') and contrasts with list_data_sources by noting it returns a single entry. However, it does not explicitly state when to use or avoid this tool versus alternatives, missing a clear when-not.

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