run_transform_map

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false) already indicate it's a write operation with potential side effects. The description adds the 'WRITE_ENABLED' requirement but does not disclose what happens to existing data, whether records are created or updated, or other behavioral details. The openWorldHint=true further suggests unpredictability, but the description lacks elaboration.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the action and includes a key prerequisite. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

The tool has moderate complexity (executes a data transformation), but the description does not mention expected outcomes, error conditions, or what the tool returns (no output schema). While annotations cover safety traits, the description omits important context for an agent deciding to invoke this tool, such as whether it's synchronous or displays a progress report.

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% with clear descriptions for both parameters (transform_map_sys_id and import_set_sys_id). The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining how to obtain these sys_ids or constraints on valid values.

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 states the specific action: 'Execute a Transform Map on an Import Set to load data'. It clearly identifies the verb (execute) and resource (Transform Map, Import Set). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_transform_map (read) or list_transform_maps (listing).

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 includes a prerequisite ('requires WRITE_ENABLED=true') but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor when not to use it. No sibling tools are referenced for comparison.

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