analyze_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 states the tool parses and reports, implying read-only behavior, but does not explicitly mention lack of side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. The output content is described at a high level.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste. The first sentence concisely states the action and scope, the second provides clear usage guidance.

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 one parameter with good schema coverage and no output schema, the description outlines what the tool outputs (tables, columns, relationships, seed order) but lacks details on the return format or structure. It is mostly complete for a simple analysis 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 100% for the single parameter, and the description adds context about acceptable formats (SQL DDL or JSON schema with 'tables' array), which is already in the schema. The description also explains what the tool reports, which goes beyond the parameter schema.

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 parses a database schema and reports tables, columns, relationships, and seed data order. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'generate_seed_data' by noting it is used first to confirm understanding.

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 'Use this first to confirm SeedWeaver understands the schema correctly,' indicating it should precede generate_seed_data. However, it does not discuss when not to use it or provide alternatives beyond the implied sequence.

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