Profile Table

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear full burden. It mentions 'bounded' and 'sampled' but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, its performance impact, error handling, or output format details. Critical behavioral traits are missing.

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 that efficiently conveys the main output components. It is not verbose, but it could benefit from slight restructuring to separate output from input constraints.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not cover return structure, edge cases, or limitations beyond 'bounded'. The tool's complexity demands more detail.

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%, yet the description does not explain any parameter's purpose or how they affect the profile. For example, 'profile', 'rowLimit', and 'topValues' are not described. The description only lists what the output contains, not how to control it.

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 specifies a 'table-level profile' with concrete components (metadata counts, key fields, time/status fields, sampled null overview). The verb 'Return' indicates output, and 'bounded' hints at limits. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like ob_describe_table or ob_get_table_stats.

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 such as ob_profile_columns or ob_get_table_summary. The description lacks context about prerequisites, typical use cases, 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.