set_time_travel_retention

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool executes ALTER DATABASE, returns effective settings read back after change, and that SQL Analytics Endpoints are rejected with ToolError. It does not mention permissions or reversibility, but the behavior is generally clear.

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 front-loaded with the purpose and has an Args section, but it includes the specific SQL command which is an implementation detail and adds verbosity. It is still relatively concise and structured.

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 3 required parameters and no annotations, the description covers all essential aspects: what the tool does, how to use it, parameter details, supported target, and error condition. The presence of an output schema (indicated by context) likely covers return values, so the description is complete.

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%, so the description compensates fully. It explains each parameter: workspace (name/GUID), item (warehouse name/GUID, rejects SQL Analytics Endpoints), and days (range 1-120 inclusive). This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's type constraints.

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 verb 'Set' and the resource 'time-travel retention period on a warehouse'. It specifies the SQL command executed and distinguishes from siblings by noting it applies only to Fabric Data Warehouses, not SQL Analytics Endpoints.

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 explicitly states usage (setting time-travel retention) and when not to use (SQL Analytics Endpoints, which are rejected with a ToolError). It mentions the tool returns effective settings after changes, but lacks explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use comparisons with similar tools.

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