tigergraph__preview_sample_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the action. It does not mention that the operation is read-only, what output is returned, or how errors are handled; the schema covers file_path semantics but not behavioral characteristics.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is concise, though slightly too terse to carry the usage and behavioral context that would make it fully self-sufficient.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description should provide more context about return values, safety, and usage. It covers the basic action but leaves an agent without enough information about what to expect when invoking the tool.

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%, with detailed explanations for file_path, profile, num_rows, graph_name, and data_source_name. The description itself adds no parameter meaning, but because the schema fully documents parameters, the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 and resource: 'Preview sample data from a file in a data source.' This distinguishes it from data source CRUD and loading-job siblings. However, it says 'file' while the schema explicitly allows a SQL query for warehouse sources, making the description slightly narrower than the actual behavior.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus creating or running a loading job, nor any prerequisite such as requiring an existing data source. The intended context is only implied by the word 'preview.'

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