base_tableDDL

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

No annotations provided, so description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions it returns formatted responses with metadata, but does not specify if the operation is read-only, if any side effects occur, or any required permissions. The description lacks depth on behavioral traits beyond the basic output.

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 moderately concise but includes a separate 'Arguments:' and 'Returns:' section that slightly bloats it. It could be streamlined to a single sentence. Some technical details (e.g., 'via SQLAlchemy') are included but may not be necessary.

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?

For a simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic functionality. However, it lacks context on prerequisites (e.g., table existence, database permissions) and does not clarify the exact DDL format returned. Annotations could supplement, but they are absent.

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 0%, so description must compensate. However, it only repeats parameter names with minimal descriptions ('Database name' and 'table name'), adding no meaning beyond the schema. No examples, constraints, or formatting details are provided.

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 displays DDL definitions for a table, involving SQLAlchemy and bind parameters. It is specific about the resource (table DDL) and action (display), but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like base_columnDescription or base_tablePreview, though the purpose is distinct enough.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of scenarios where it should be used or avoided, nor any reference to sibling tools like base_tableList or base_columnDescription that might cover similar needs.

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