GTech Networks DB: get table schema doc

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Describes what the tool returns (columns, types, PK/FK, business-meaning notes). Does not state authorization needs or rate limits, but the expected read-only behavior is implied by 'Get' and scope. Could mention if it requires database connectivity, but overall transparent.

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?

Single well-structured sentence with database restriction front-loaded in brackets. No wasted words, concise yet informative.

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?

For a simple tool with 1 parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return content, and usage restriction. Could be slightly improved by noting it only works for existing tables, but current text is adequate.

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 coverage is 100% with one parameter 'table' described as case-insensitive. Description adds minimal new semantic meaning beyond schema, only reiterating 'specific table' and scope. Baseline 3 is appropriate; description does not significantly compensate.

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?

Description clearly states verb (get), resource (full schema documentation for a specific table), and scope (GTech/NetWorks Core G3E_* schema). Explicitly distinguishes from other systems by stating 'Do not use for tables belonging to any other database/system.' No sibling differentiation needed beyond that.

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?

Explicitly says 'Do not use for tables belonging to any other database/system,' which provides a clear when-not-to-use guideline. Implies usage for GTech tables needing schema docs, but does not explicitly name alternative tools like get_relationships or resolve_tables_for_query for related tasks.

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