sigma_list_columns_for_table

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds minimal behavioral context (tableId scoping) but does not mention anything about return format or pagination, which is acceptable given the output schema exists. It does not contradict the annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundancy. Every word carries meaning, making it an exemplary model of conciseness.

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?

Given that this is a simple one-parameter read-only tool with an output schema present, the description is sufficient. It clearly states the operation and the key input, and the sibling context clarifies the target resource. No significant gaps for practical use.

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 schema_description_coverage at 0%, the description compensates minimally by explaining that table_id refers to the warehouse table. It does not describe the format or how to obtain the tableId, but for a single simple parameter this provides just enough meaning.

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 uses a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('columns for a warehouse table'), and a key identifier ('by its tableId'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like sigma_list_workbook_columns or sigma_list_data_model_columns, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 usage is implied by the name and description: when you have a tableId and need its columns, use this tool. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives such as sigma_list_workbook_columns, so the agent is left to infer the scope from context.

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