knowledge_schema

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds that the tool reads from local CollectionDef objects and requires no network connection, which is valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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?

Three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the function, explaining the data source, and providing usage guidance. No unnecessary 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 simple single-parameter schema, high schema coverage, and presence of an output schema, the description covers purpose, source, and usage adequately. Minor gap: it doesn't explicitly state that omitting the parameter returns schemas for all collections, but this is implied by the schema default and the phrase 'omit for all.'

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%, so the baseline is 3. The parameter 'collection' is already documented in the schema (enum and default). The description adds that the tool discovers expected property names and types, indirectly explaining the parameter's purpose, but does not add explicit format or syntax details beyond the 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 verb ('Return'), resource ('property schemas for knowledge collections'), and differentiates from siblings by noting 'Reads from local CollectionDef objects — no Weaviate connection needed.' It also explicitly mentions being used before knowledge_ingest, further distinguishing its role.

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 provides explicit guidance: 'Use this before knowledge_ingest to discover expected property names and types.' This tells the agent exactly when to invoke this tool and hints at the alternative (knowledge_ingest) for later steps.

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