get-schema

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It merely states the tool 'returns the schema map' with no details on side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or error conditions. The behavioral insight is minimal.

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 consists of two short, front-loaded sentences. The first states the purpose, the second provides usage guidelines. Every sentence is necessary and concise, with no wasted words.

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 complexity of the input schema (nested databaseConfig object, three parameters, no output schema), the description is far from complete. It does not explain the return format, how parameters influence results, or common pitfalls, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and three parameters (apiKey, databaseConfig, databaseConnectionId), the description adds no meaning to any parameter. It fails to explain their purpose or usage, leaving the agent without guidance on how to invoke the tool correctly.

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 the tool 'returns the schema map for the database' with a clear verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate itself from sibling tools like 'get-index-map' or explain what a schema map is, missing the highest level of distinction.

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?

The description explicitly says 'Only use this tool after previous attempts fail, or when specifically requested,' providing clear context on when to use it. It does not mention when not to use it or alternative tools, so it lacks exclusions.

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