get-container-sample-data-by-name

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

No annotations exist, so the description must reveal behavior. It only states 'get sample data' without explaining what sample data entails (e.g., format, count, permissions). This is insufficient for a data retrieval tool.

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 unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose.

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?

With one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It lacks details on return format, size limits, or behavior when container doesn't exist. For a data retrieval tool, this is incomplete.

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% for the single parameter 'fqn', which has a clear description. The tool description adds marginal value by restating 'by fully qualified name'. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action (get sample data) and the resource (storage container by fully qualified name). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-container-sample-data' or 'get-topic-sample-data-by-name', which have similar purposes.

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. For example, there is no mention of differences from 'get-container-sample-data' or prerequisites like container existence. The agent lacks context for appropriate use.

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