get_stored_procedure

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read operation, and the description adds no further behavioral context. It does not describe what 'definition' includes, whether it returns SQL text, what happens if the procedure does not exist, or any permission requirements.

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 extremely short, with no filler or redundant phrasing. It front-loads the core purpose effectively, though it could be expanded slightly without losing its concise character.

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 simple two-parameter read-only tool, the definition is minimally viable: the parameters are fully documented and the readOnlyHint covers safety. However, with no output schema and no return-value description, the agent is left guessing about the exact shape or content of the returned definition.

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 input schema already provides full descriptions for both required parameters (name and connection), so the description does not need to repeat them. It also adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, which is why the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a clear verb and resource: it retrieves the stored procedure definition. It is unambiguous about which object it targets and is distinguishable from siblings like get_schema or get_indexes, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with them.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as query or get_execution_plan. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or typical scenarios, so the agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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