base_tableDDL

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It partially discloses behavior for the 'persist' parameter (materializes as volatile table and returns name), but does not mention side effects, permissions, or error conditions. It adds some value but lacks comprehensive behavioral context.

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 concise, front-loading the main purpose, followed by a list of arguments. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity and contains no superfluous text.

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?

The description covers the basics for a simple tool with 3 parameters and no output schema. However, it lacks usage guidelines and full behavioral transparency (e.g., permissions, error cases), making it adequate but not comprehensive for an agent to use autonomously.

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 baseline is 3. The description largely repeats parameter descriptions from the schema, with minor addition for 'persist' explaining its effect. It does not provide deeper semantics or constraints beyond what the schema already offers.

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 'Displays the DDL definition of a table.' It uses a specific verb (displays) and resource (DDL definition), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like base_tablePreview (preview data) and base_readQuery (read query results).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer usage on its own.

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