Matrix42 schema discovery

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description reinforces read-only status in the first sentence. It adds valuable behavioral context: list_data_definitions excludes pickups by default, describe_data_definition defaults to attributes because relations can exceed a hundred, and get_pickup_values resolves pickups via two alternative routes. This goes well beyond the annotations.

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 dense but perfectly structured: a one-sentence scope statement, a per-action breakdown, and a closing typical flow. Every sentence adds information, and the most important routing guidance ('read this first') is placed early. No filler or redundant restatement of the schema.

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?

This is a multi-action tool with six distinct operations and eight parameters, and the description covers every action's purpose, the parameters each action consumes, defaults, and a recommended sequence. With no output schema, the description still tells the agent what kind of result each action returns. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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%, but the description adds substantial meaning beyond the schema: it explains the purpose of each action, which parameters apply to which action, the default behavior of include, and the two ways to resolve pickup values. The 'read this first' guidance for schema_overview and the typical flow description give parameters operational context the schema alone lacks.

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 opens with a precise statement of what the tool does: 'Explore the Matrix42 data model of the connected instance (read-only metadata).' It then enumerates six concrete action verbs and their resources, making the tool's scope unmistakable and distinguishing it from the data-querying purpose implied by siblings like data_query.

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 gives explicit internal routing: schema_overview should be read first, followed by the typical flow overview → list_* → describe_* → get_pickup_values. It also explains when to use pickup_class versus name plus attribute. It does not explicitly contrast against sibling tools, but the read-only metadata framing and detailed action-level guidance are strong enough to guide selection.

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