get_schema_migrations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. "Show" and "recent" imply a safe, bounded read limited to recent entries and name the source database, which is useful. However, ordering, pagination interaction with 'recent', and auth requirements are unstated.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the scope ('recent') and source ('Studio database') are stated immediately. It is efficient, though slightly terse given the lack of supporting detail.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-shape explanation is not required, and for a one-parameter read tool the description is minimally serviceable. The absence of annotations and 0% parameter coverage still leaves gaps around the limit behavior and when to reach for this 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?

There is exactly one parameter, limit, with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it. The word "recent" hints at a bounded result but does not explain the limit parameter's role, default of 20, or semantics of ordering.

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 ("Show") and resource ("recent Drizzle schema migrations") plus the data source ("the Studio database"), so an agent knows exactly what it retrieves. It does not differentiate from any sibling, but no sibling name suggests migration inspection, so the risk of confusion is low.

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 statement of when to call this versus other status/diagnostic tools, no prerequisites, and no mention of the alternative paths for inspecting Studio state. Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name.

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