transform_data

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that format returns a new handle with changes_applied, and convert requires to_mtype and uses convert_to(). It does not mention side effects on original handle, permissions, or error handling, but the core behavior is well-explained.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then details actions and deprecation. No redundant information. Every sentence adds value.

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?

No output schema, so description should clarify return values. For format, it mentions 'returns changes_applied', but for convert, it only says 'return a new handle' implicitly. Missing explicit return structure for convert. Also, no mention of how errors are handled or prerequisites. Adequate but with gaps.

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 parameters are documented. The description adds context by explaining the two actions and their default behaviors (e.g., fill_missing defaults to true). It also clarifies that to_mtype is required only for convert, which goes beyond 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?

Description clearly states it transforms a data handle into a new handle, with two distinct actions: 'format' for auto-fixing time series issues and 'convert' for changing mtype. It also notes it replaces the legacy format_time_series tool, distinguishing it from sibling tools.

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?

Description provides clear guidance on when to use each action: format for fixing time series issues, convert for changing mtype. It does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the actions are well-defined and the context of sibling tools makes it clear that this is the primary data transformation tool.

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