base_columnDescription

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds value by explaining the persist parameter: 'If True, materializes result as a volatile table and returns table name.' This discloses a behavioral trait—materialization—that annotations do not cover. However, it does not discuss rate limits, authentication, or error conditions.

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 extremely concise: a one-sentence purpose followed by a bullet-style parameter list. Every word earns its place, with no extraneous information. The critical purpose is front-loaded.

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 tool has 3 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior (showing column info) and the persist option. However, it does not describe what 'detailed column information' includes (e.g., data types, nullable, default), leaving the agent without a clear picture of the return format. This is a modest gap.

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 description repeats the parameter descriptions nearly verbatim (e.g., 'Database name. Defaults to '%' (all databases).'). It adds no new semantic insight beyond what the schema already provides.

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 tool's purpose: 'Shows detailed column information about a database table or view.' This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like base_tableList or base_tablePreview, which focus on tables or previews rather than column details.

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 lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as base_tablePreview or base_tableDDL. No mention of contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions. The agent is given no indication of when this tool is appropriate compared to siblings.

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