Retrieve the current Stata dataset schema, including structure, missing-value summaries, and sample preview, from a fresh schema text log for data inspection.
使用独立且每次覆盖的 schema text log，读取当前 Stata 数据集结构、缺失摘要和样本预览并返回给调用端
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sample_rows | No | 样本预览行数，默认 20 | |
| include_sample | No | 是否包含样本预览，默认 true | |
| include_missing | No | 是否包含缺失值摘要，默认 true | |
| include_codebook | No | 是否包含 codebook, compact，默认 true |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It does disclose a meaningful implementation detail — the schema text log is independent and overwritten on every call. It does not mention potential side effects, required session state, or what happens if no dataset is loaded, but it provides more than a bare statement of purpose.
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 entire description is one sentence with no filler or repetition. It is compact, though the opening clause about the schema text log delays the main action slightly.
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 and no annotations, the description gives only a broad sense of return content. It covers the data structure, missing summary, and sample preview, but omits usage boundaries, return format, or error conditions. It is adequate for a moderately simple read tool, but not 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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description loosely aligns with the parameters by mentioning sample preview and missing summary, but it adds no detail about defaults, combinations, or behavior beyond the schema.
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 names a specific verb (read) and resource (current Stata dataset structure, missingness summary, and sample preview), and adds a unique mechanism (independent schema text log). It is clear, though it does not explicitly contrast with the similarly named sibling stata_get_data_info.
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 intended use is implied: call this when you need the current dataset's schema, missing summary, or sample preview. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when to choose this over stata_get_data_info or stata_get_results, so alternatives are not addressed.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.