sample_rows

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention whether sampling is random, whether it uses ORDER BY, or if it's read-only. The term 'sample' is ambiguous.

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 sentence, which is concise but unduly brief given the complexity of the tool. It could be longer to include essential details without being verbose.

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?

With 6 parameters, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is severely incomplete. It should explain sampling behavior, optional filters, limit, and connection selection. Currently, it provides no context beyond the name.

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 coverage is only 33% (database and connection have descriptions). The tool description adds no meaning for any of the 6 parameters, including critical ones like 'where' and 'params'. The description fails to explain their purpose or format.

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 uses a specific verb 'sample' and resource 'rows from a table', clearly indicating the action. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'query' or 'explore_table', which could also retrieve rows.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'query' or 'count'. The description lacks context about typical use cases (e.g., random sampling, quick preview) or when not to use it.

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