dataverse_check_relationship_eligibility

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the behavioral context that this is a pre-validation step returning a boolean 'eligible' for the requested check_type. No contradiction with annotations.

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 compact, front-loading the primary purpose in the first sentence, then providing usage timing, return type, and sibling differentiation in subsequent sentences. No filler or redundant content.

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 strong annotations and existing output schema, the description is complete for its intended pre-validation use. It explains when to use it, what it returns, and which alternative to use when the table is unknown, covering all necessary context.

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% from the tool description; it only points to 'check_type field for valid values' and does not describe dataverse_url or table_logical_name. Although the schema itself contains detailed descriptions, the description fails to compensate for the low coverage, adding minimal value beyond the schema.

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 states the tool pre-validates whether a table supports a specific relationship role with a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling dataverse_get_valid_relationship_entities by contrasting 'is THIS ONE table OK?' (boolean check) versus 'WHICH tables are OK?' (enumeration).

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?

It explicitly says to call only immediately before dataverse_create_one_to_many_relationship or dataverse_create_many_to_many_relationship, and not for general queries or data reads. It also names dataverse_get_valid_relationship_entities as the alternative for when the specific table is unknown.

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