Promote Table To Memory

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable details: the table is promoted to global scope, the operation uses updateTableState, and the tool is idempotent, leaving already-loaded global tables untouched. This is useful behavior beyond what the annotations alone convey.

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 concise and front-loaded, with the main purpose stated in the first sentence. The follow-up sentences add essential details about the API, idempotency, and discovery via list_source_tables without unnecessary fluff.

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 three-parameter tool with a fully documented schema and an output schema, the description covers the operation, scope, idempotency, and how to find candidate tables. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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 100%, with each parameter clearly described as server_id, caslib_name, and table_name. The description reinforces the role of table_name and caslib context but does not need to add more because the schema is already complete.

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?

Description clearly states the specific action: load a source table into CAS memory at global scope. It also explains the underlying API and explicitly points to list_source_tables for discovering unloaded tables, which differentiates this from sibling tools like list_castables or list_source_tables.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool by explaining it promotes tables to global scope and is idempotent. It explicitly recommends list_source_tables to discover promotable tables, which provides a usage path, though it does not explicitly state when to prefer alternatives over this tool.

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