show_partitions

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states it shows partitions, implying a read operation, but omits important aspects like whether permissions are required, performance implications for large tables, or what the output format is (though an output schema exists, it is not described).

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 a single sentence with no wasted words. It is concise and front-loaded with the key action and resource. Every word is necessary.

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 is minimal but paired with an output schema that presumably defines return values. However, it lacks context on what partition information is returned (e.g., partition columns, value ranges) and how to interpret the results. For a simple tool, it is borderline 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 each parameter having a basic description (e.g., 'catalog name'). The tool description adds 'Iceberg table partitions' but does not provide additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already offers. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 specifies the verb 'Show' and the resource 'Iceberg table partitions', clearly distinguishing it from other show tools for different aspects (files, snapshots, etc.). However, it lacks details on what exactly is shown (e.g., column names, partition values) which could be inferred from the output schema.

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 the various other 'show_*' sibling tools. The agent is left to infer usage solely from the name and description, which is insufficient for effective selection.

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