MCP Trino Server

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. 'List' implies read-only safety but doesn't confirm idempotency, pagination behavior, or what happens if the catalog doesn't exist. Lacks disclosure on output format despite having an output schema.

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?

Extremely concise at 6 words. Front-loaded with action verb. No redundant or wasteful text, though arguably underspecified given the rich sibling ecosystem. Efficient but minimal.

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?

Adequate for a single-parameter listing tool where output schema exists (so return values needn't be described). However, given the complex domain (17+ related discovery tools) and lack of annotations, the description could clarify the catalog→schema hierarchy to aid tool selection.

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 'catalog' fully documented. Description mentions 'in a catalog' which reinforces the parameter relationship, but adds no syntax details, format constraints, or examples beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate for high schema coverage.

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?

Clear verb 'List' with specific resource 'schemas' and scope 'in a catalog'. Implicitly distinguishes from sibling show_catalogs (which lists catalogs) by requiring a catalog parameter, though it doesn't clarify distinction from show_catalog_tree which may show hierarchical views.

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 on when to use this flat list versus show_catalog_tree (hierarchical view) or how it relates to the broader discovery workflow (show_catalogs → show_schemas → show_tables). No prerequisites or error conditions mentioned.

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