describe_cube

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that locale only affects member captions (not names), and that unknown cubes return a 'did you mean' error. However, it does not explicitly state read-only behavior or any potential side effects, which is a minor gap.

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 (three sentences) with key information front-loaded. No unnecessary words, every sentence adds value.

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 three parameters, no annotations, and an output schema (not detailed), the description covers the core functionality: cube structure, optional member listing, and locale handling. It also mentions error messaging. It is nearly complete, though it could mention the output format or link to the output schema.

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 compensate. It explains that cube is required, level lists members when provided, and locale controls caption language with a default of 'en'. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema, though it could clarify the type of members (e.g., all members or just top-level).

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 'Introspect one cube: its drillable level names and measures.' This is a specific verb (introspect) and resource (cube), and it distinguishes from siblings list_cubes and query_cube by focusing on a single cube's structure.

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 explains when to pass optional parameters (level to list members, locale for language), and mentions error behavior for unknown cubes. It could be more explicit about not using for querying data, but the distinction from sibling tools is clear enough.

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