dba_tableSpace

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

Annotations indicate read-only and idempotent, which the description does not contradict. The description adds critical behavioral context beyond annotations by explaining the 'persist' parameter mutates the result into a volatile table. However, it does not mention potential performance impacts of running without filters.

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, and lists arguments in a clear bullet-like format. While the argument list is redundant with the schema, it aids quick reading without scrolling. No wasted sentences.

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 explains all parameters but omits the output format (columns returned, or what 'table name' is returned when persist=True). For a data-retrieval tool, describing the return structure is important. Given no output schema, the description should compensate but does not.

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 input schema already describes all parameters in detail. The description repeats these descriptions verbatim, adding no new meaning. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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 it retrieves table space usage across all tables, with optional filters by database and/or table name. It distinguishes from sibling tools like dba_databaseSpace (database-level space) and dba_systemSpace (system-level space) by specifying table-level granularity.

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 implies usage via filtering options and the 'persist' parameter, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like dba_databaseSpace or base_tableList. No when-not or exclusion criteria are provided.

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