preview_sample

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true and a title, so the description carries most of the behavioral load and does so well: it discloses the exact return payload (signed download URL, ~50 rows, schema), the optional synthesized-answer behavior, and that no purchase is required. It stops short of covering auth/permission needs or URL expiry.

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?

Three tight sentences: purpose first, then return shape, then the optional question behavior with a concrete example. No filler, and the most decision-relevant information is front-loaded.

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 no output schema, the description steps in to describe the return shape well (download URL, row count, schema, synthesized_answer field). For a simple two-parameter read tool this is nearly sufficient; only minor operational details like URL lifetime or size limits are absent.

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%, so both parameters are already fully documented in the schema, establishing the baseline of 3. The description reinforces the optional 'question' parameter and its synthesized_answer outcome, but adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (preview sample rows of a dataset) plus the concrete return (signed download URL for ~50 rows and the schema). It implies a distinction from full dataset access via 'no purchase required,' but never names the siblings get_dataset or search_datasets, so an agent must infer the boundary itself.

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?

Gives a clear purpose-driven context — use it to verify columns, format, and quality — which implies the when-to-use case. However, it never states when to prefer get_dataset or search_datasets instead, nor any prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the routing decision to inference.

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