Retrieve a MySQL table’s column definitions, indexes, and CREATE statement to inspect its structure before writing queries or migrations.
Muestra columnas, índices y el CREATE TABLE de una tabla.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| table | Yes | ||
| database | No | Base de datos a usar (por defecto la actual de la conexión activa) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying the returned content (columns, indexes, CREATE TABLE), but omits error handling, permission requirements, and output format.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes directly to communicating what the tool returns.
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?
No output schema exists, so the description must convey return values; it does so adequately (columns, indexes, CREATE TABLE). However, it omits table identifier format and error behavior, leaving gaps for a database introspection tool.
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 50%: the optional 'database' parameter has a description, but the required 'table' parameter has none. The description adds no parameter-level meaning (e.g., table name format) and therefore does not compensate for the undocumented required parameter.
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?
States a specific verb ('Muestra') and resource ('tabla'), and enumerates the returned content (columnas, índices, CREATE TABLE). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_tables, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or differentiate in words.
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 when-to-use guidance, no alternatives named, and no prerequisites stated. The description only declares what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.