sample_rows

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the row limit (max 100) and default (10), which is helpful, but doesn't mention ordering, randomness of sampling, or any side effects (though likely none). It could be more transparent.

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, well-structured sentence. It is front-loaded with the action ('Return up to n preview rows') and includes the key constraint (max 100). Every word earns its place.

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 tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description covers the basics: what it returns, the limit, and the required table. However, it leaves ambiguity about 'preview' (first N rows vs. random sample) and lacks detail on return structure. Adequate but not complete.

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% (no descriptions for params in schema). The description mentions 'n' and 'table' but adds no new details about their format, constraints (beyond max), or semantics. It fails to compensate for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 that the tool returns preview rows from a table, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'describe_table' (schema info) or 'run_sql' (arbitrary queries), though it doesn't explicitly contrast them.

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 for quick data previews via 'preview rows', but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this over siblings, prerequisites, or when not to use it (e.g., for full data extraction).

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