relationships_list_foreign_keys

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It uses 'List' to imply a read-only operation and discloses the 'all' behavior for schema_name, but it does not elaborate on permissions, error conditions, or return format, which is a gap given the absence of 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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no wasted words. The purpose and key usage variation are stated efficiently, and every part earns its place.

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 single-parameter list tool with an output schema, this description is reasonably complete. It states what is returned (foreign keys with from/to table and columns) and handles the 'all' case. It lacks depth on error handling or permission requirements, but that is acceptable for a simple read-only metadata 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds the crucial 'all' special value for schema_name, but does not explain other parameter semantics or potential values beyond what the schema provides. The schema already gives the default 'public', so the description adds marginal value.

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 'List foreign keys (from/to table and columns)' clearly identifies the resource and action, distinguishing it from sibling tools like relationships_list_indexes and triggers_list. It is specific and unambiguous.

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 gives a clear usage hint: schema_name='all' for all, which guides the agent on how to use the sole parameter. It does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or alternatives, but the context is clear enough for a metadata listing tool.

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