get_table_stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It transparently indicates the tool is a read-only data retrieval (get statistics), but it omits details such as whether column information covers data types, nullable flags, or other schema details, and does not mention performance implications or failure modes.

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 verb and resource. It wastes no words and clearly communicates the core function.

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 simple parameter and no output schema, the description provides the key outputs (row count, column information) but omits potential additional statistics and error behavior. It is functional but leaves some ambiguity about the exact return structure.

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%, so the schema already documents the tableName parameter. The description adds 'including row count and column information' which loosely maps to the output, but it does not add new meaning to the parameter itself beyond what the schema provides.

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 tool 'gets statistics' about a table, naming the specific resource and outputs (row count, column information). It is a specific verb+resource combination, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like get_table_schema or execute_query, which could also retrieve related data.

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 given on when to use this tool over alternatives such as execute_query or get_table_schema. The description implies usage for retrieving table statistics, but it does not state exclusions or comparison with siblings.

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