Get Rapid7 Schema

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond annotations: tables not yet loaded are omitted, and schemas are returned as formatted JSON keyed by table name. No contradiction exists.

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 compact, well-structured, and front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence adds useful information: scope, included tables, omission behavior, and usage intent. No filler or redundancy.

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 zero-parameter, read-only schema tool with an output schema and rich annotations, the description covers everything needed: what it returns, which tables, the omission nuance, and how to use it. Nothing critical is missing.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to document parameter behavior. The baseline of 4 applies because the schema already fully covers the empty parameter set.

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: 'Get the schema of all database tables,' then enumerates exactly which tables are included. This makes the tool's scope unambiguous and distinguishes it from query/stats/export tools.

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?

It explicitly tells the agent when to use the tool: 'Use this to understand what data is available before writing queries.' It does not discuss exclusions or compare against alternatives, but given the sibling set, no other tool claims schema discovery, so the guidance is adequate.

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