Get Schema (deprecated — use mssql_list_schema_objects)

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds the critical deprecation status and aliasing context, which is valuable behavioral/maintenance info beyond what annotations provide. No contradiction.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the deprecation notice and immediate alternative. Every word earns its place; no fluff.

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 deprecated alias, the description is complete: it states the deprecation and points to the replacement. It doesn't elaborate on behavior or return format, but as an alias, those details are inherited from the target tool. Given the annotations and simplicity, this 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for parameter meaning but does not. The schema provides enums and defaults, but the meaning of parameters like schemaName is left entirely to the agent's inference. Minimal help.

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 clearly states this is a deprecated alias for mssql_list_schema_objects, which conveys the tool's function (listing schema objects) and distinguishes it from siblings by explicitly naming the replacement. The purpose is implicit but unambiguous given the title and description.

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?

The description explicitly instructs to use mssql_list_schema_objects instead, providing a clear when-not-to-use directive and naming the alternative. This is the strongest possible usage guidance for a deprecated tool.

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