tigergraph__preview_sample_data

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the description's 'Preview' is consistent with these. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond annotations, such as output format, error handling, or side effects. It does not contradict 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 a single, focused sentence that front-loads the action ('Preview sample data'). It contains no unnecessary words and is appropriately concise for a simple read-only operation.

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?

Given the simple nature of the tool, annotations covering safety, and the schema documenting all parameters, the description is sufficient. It could mention the return of sample rows or the distinction between file and query, but those are implied by the schema and tool name. The description adequately conveys the core function.

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?

The input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, including detailed explanations for file_path (distinguishing object store vs. warehouse) and other fields. The tool description does not add any parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so it relies on the schema for parameter meaning.

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 a specific verb (preview) and resource (sample data from a file in a data source). It is clear and distinguishes from other tools by its unique focus on sampling, though it does not explicitly name an alternative. It is more specific than a generic 'preview' and fits the tool's purpose.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer that it is for inspecting data before loading. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or mentions of alternative tools.

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