MCP Trino Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not indicate that this is a read-only metadata operation (especially important given the destructive sibling 'expire_snapshots'), nor does it explain what constitutes a snapshot in the Iceberg context or the format/structure of the returned data.

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?

While the description is brief and front-loaded, four words is insufficient for the domain complexity (Iceberg table snapshots) and lack of annotations. This is under-specification rather than efficient conciseness; additional context about behavior or safety is needed.

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?

Despite 100% input schema coverage and presence of an output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool querying complex Iceberg metadata. It lacks safety indicators (read-only hint), distinctions from the destructive 'expire_snapshots' sibling, and context about what snapshot metadata includes.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents all three parameters (catalog, schema_name, table) adequately. The description adds no parameter-specific guidance, so it meets the baseline score of 3 for high-coverage schemas.

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 states the basic action ('Show') and resource ('Iceberg table snapshots'), but 'Show' is vague compared to specific verbs like 'List' or 'Return'. Crucially, it fails to distinguish from sibling tool 'expire_snapshots', which performs destructive operations on the same resource type (snapshots).

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus similar metadata tools like 'show_table_history', 'show_refs', or 'show_manifests', nor does it mention the prerequisite of having an existing Iceberg table.

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