get_datasource_by_name

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 'gets detailed information' without specifying what that information includes, whether it's a read-only operation, error behavior, or performance characteristics. It lacks crucial context about what 'detailed information' means for a datasource.

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 gets straight to the point with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple lookup tool and front-loads the essential information.

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?

For a tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'detailed information' includes, error conditions, or how this differs from other datasource tools. The agent lacks crucial context to use this tool effectively.

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%, and the description only mentions 'using its name' without explaining what constitutes a valid datasource name, format requirements, or case sensitivity. With one undocumented parameter, the description adds minimal value beyond what's obvious from the parameter name.

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 ('Get detailed information') and resource ('about a datasource') with a specific lookup method ('using its name'). It distinguishes from sibling 'get_datasource_by_uid' by specifying name-based lookup, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'check_datasource_exists' or 'list_datasources'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_datasource_by_uid', 'check_datasource_exists', or 'list_datasources'. The description only states what the tool does, not when it's appropriate versus other datasource-related tools.

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