Describe tool

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false. Description reinforces with 'Read-only; no database access.' and describes error behavior (registered=false + did_you_mean). No contradictions.

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?

Concise single sentence covering return value, usage context, error handling, and read-only nature. Followed by example. No redundant information.

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 the tool's simplicity (1 required param, no nested objects, output schema exists), the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, usage, error handling, safety, and example. Fully 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?

Only one parameter (name) with no schema description coverage (0%). Description adds value by mentioning 'by name' and providing an example: describe_tool(name='run_select'), but does not elaborate on format or constraints beyond what's obvious.

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?

Clearly states it returns the full registered schema for one MCP tool by name, including description, input_schema, output_schema, and capability bucket. Distinguishes from siblings like describe_self by specifying it targets a single tool.

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 advises using this tool when an agent encounters a tool error and needs to verify the call shape without re-walking the full describe_self payload, especially when transport only surfaces tools/call. Also mentions did_you_mean on error, providing clear guidance.

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