fetch_datasource_entries

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states it's a list operation. It doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it's read-only, pagination behavior (implied by 'per_page' and 'page' but not explained), rate limits, authentication needs, or what the output looks like.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose and lists optional parameters without unnecessary words. Every part earns its place, making it appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavior, output format, error handling, and usage context, which are critical for a tool with 4 parameters and list functionality.

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%, but the description mentions three optional parameters ('dimension', 'per_page', 'page'), adding some meaning beyond the bare schema. However, it doesn't explain what 'dimension' means or provide details on parameter usage, leaving gaps for the required 'datasource_id' and the others.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('entries for a datasource'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'fetch_datasources' or 'get_datasource', which focus on datasources themselves rather than their entries.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, such as needing an existing datasource, or compare it to similar tools like 'fetch_datasources' or 'create_datasource_entry'.

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