catalog

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states 'Get 4D database schema information' without detailing what the operation returns, whether it requires prior login, or how the 'all' parameter affects the output. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but no further behavioral context is given.

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 description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant information. It is appropriately sized for a tool with one parameter and a straightforward purpose, earning a high score for conciseness and structure.

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 that there is no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide enough context to understand what 'schema information' entails (e.g., tables, fields, types). It does not, leaving the return format ambiguous. The absence of usage guidance further reduces completeness, making the description insufficient for an agent to predict the tool's full behavior.

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?

The input schema fully documents the only parameter 'all' (100% coverage). The description itself adds no parameter semantics beyond the schema, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage. The description does not mention the parameter at all, so it neither enhances nor detracts from the schema's existing explanation.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('4D database schema information'), immediately distinguishing this tool from the data-manipulation siblings (query, upsert, delete, callFunction). It unambiguously identifies the tool's purpose as retrieving metadata rather than operating on data.

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 no context for when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it should be used for schema introspection before queries, nor does it exclude usage scenarios. The only implied usage is 'when you need schema info', but there is no explicit guidance or comparison to sibling tools.

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