Get database schema

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It clearly states the tool is a listing operation (read-only) and enumerates exactly what is returned (tables, columns, types, keys). It does not mention side effects, but none are plausible for a schema query; the transparency is adequate.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the core functionality and enumerates what is listed; the second gives usage priority. Every word earns its place.

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?

With zero parameters and no output schema, the description must fully specify both the return content and usage context. It does: lists the table names, column attributes, foreign keys, and explicitly directs to use it first. Nothing needed to call the tool correctly is omitted.

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?

The tool takes no parameters and the schema is empty. The description explicitly says 'Takes no parameters.' Per the baseline rule for zero-parameter tools, a score of 4 is appropriate; no additional semantic explanation is needed.

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 is a specific verb-resource pairing: 'Lists every business table...' naming tables, columns, and foreign keys. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools, which are all specific analytical queries, by describing a schema-wide introspection operation.

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 instructs 'Use this first to understand what data is available before calling the other tools.' This tells the agent when to use it relative to all siblings and sets expectation of a preliminary step.

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