List foreign keys

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

Discloses behavior beyond annotations: explains cache bypass with `fresh=true`, return format (list of objects with specified fields), and 'resolved to columns and referenced table.' Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds value.

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 tight sentences plus an example. Front-loaded with purpose, no filler. Every sentence adds value.

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 simple tool, annotations (readOnlyHint true), and implied output schema (return fields listed), the description covers essential behavior and parameters. Missing explicit description of all parameters, but example helps. Overall 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?

Description adds meaning for the `fresh` parameter (bypass cache) beyond the schema (which only has a default and type). The `schema` parameter is mentioned only in the example, and `database` is partially described in the schema. With 33% schema coverage, the description compensates somewhat but not fully.

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 'List foreign keys in a schema, resolved to columns and referenced table.' The verb 'list' and specific resource 'foreign keys' make the purpose unambiguous, and it differentiates from sibling tools like list_constraints by focusing solely on foreign keys.

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?

Provides guidance on when to use the `fresh` parameter to bypass cache after schema changes, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_constraints or list_indexes. Usage context is implied but not compared to siblings.

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