describe_dataset

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'Reads metadata only and does not modify the dataset,' which is a key behavioral trait. This is sufficient for a non-destructive tool, though it does not cover error conditions or prerequisites.

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, front-loaded with the main action and followed by usage guidance and safety note. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, read-only), the description covers all necessary context: what it does, what it inspects, and that it does not modify data. An output schema exists, so return values do not need elaboration. The description is complete for an AI agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 single parameter 'dataset' is described in the schema with path requirements. The description adds meaning by explaining that the tool inspects data type, geometry, CRS, and extent, which clarifies the purpose of the parameter. Schema description coverage is 0% per context (though parameter has schema description), so the description compensates well.

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 the tool's purpose: describe an existing dataset using ArcPy Describe. It specifies the types of datasets (feature class, table, raster, geodatabase item) and the information returned (data type, geometry type, CRS, extent). It distinguishes itself from siblings by advising use 'before choosing an analysis tool.'

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 clear guidance on when to use this tool ('before choosing an analysis tool') and emphasizes it is read-only. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide direct alternatives from the sibling list, though the context is clear.

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