get_castable_columns

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses the type of metadata returned and implies a read-only operation, but it does not mention potential side effects, permissions, or behavior when the limit parameter is exceeded. The description adds some context but lacks deeper behavioral detail.

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 that immediately states the tool's purpose. It is concise, front-loaded, and contains no redundant 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?

The tool is simple (4 params, no nested objects) and has an output schema, so the description does not need to detail return values. The one-sentence description adequately covers the purpose and key metadata types, though it omits the effect of the 'limit' parameter on results.

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 input schema provides descriptions for all four parameters (100% coverage), so the description's mention of 'names, types, labels, formats' adds little beyond schema documentation. It does not clarify parameter semantics further, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 action ('Get column metadata') and the target resource ('a CAS table'), and enumerates the included fields (names, types, labels, formats). This differentiates it from sibling tools like get_castable_info (table-level info) and get_castable_data (data retrieval).

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 retrieving column metadata from a CAS table, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. No comparison with sibling tools is offered, so guidance is only implicit.

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