Get Castable Info

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

The description aligns with the annotations (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false) by presenting a non-destructive read operation. It adds useful behavioral context by specifying the kind of metadata returned, such as row count and size, without contradicting any annotation.

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, scannable sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Get metadata') and immediately includes concrete output examples. Every word contributes value, and there is no redundant restating of the tool name or title.

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 simple read-only metadata lookup, the description is complete. The annotations declare safety, the schema documents all required parameters, and an output schema exists, so the description does not need to explain return values or side effects.

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 already provides 100% description coverage for all three parameters (server_id, table_name, caslib_name). The tool description does not add further parameter-level meaning, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the semantic burden.

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 a specific verb ('Get'), a resource ('metadata for a CAS table'), and concrete examples ('row count, column count, size'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_castable_data or get_castable_columns, which retrieve table contents or column definitions rather than metadata.

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 when to use the tool: when you need table-level metadata rather than actual data or column lists. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like get_castable_columns, get_castable_data, or list_castables, nor does it state when not to use this tool.

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