Reads the effective YAML schema for a table, masking sensitive default values unless reveal is true. Use it to understand table structure before querying or editing personal records.
Read effective YAML schema; sensitive default values are masked unless reveal=true.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| table | Yes | ||
| reveal | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that sensitive default values are masked unless reveal=true, a key privacy behavior, but it omits permission requirements, side effects beyond masking, and whether reveal is privileged.
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 definition is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, and the semicolon cleanly separates the main purpose from the masking caveat.
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 simple two-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose and masking behavior adequately. However, it lacks table parameter meaning and sibling routing guidance, which matters given no annotations and 0% schema description coverage.
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 0%, so the description must define both parameters. It explains reveal's masking/unmasking effect but says nothing about the required table parameter, leaving its identifier format and scope ambiguous.
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 a specific verb, 'Read', and resource, 'effective YAML schema', and adds the masking caveat. However, it does not explicitly name the table resource or distinguish itself from siblings such as list_tables, so the table focus must be inferred from the tool name and required parameter.
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?
There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternatives such as list_tables or query_rows are mentioned. The purpose implies schema inspection, but the agent receives no routing criteria.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.