get_space_usage

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It only states the basic function, omitting details like read-only nature, permission requirements, output format, or performance implications. This is minimal transparency for a database query tool.

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, concise sentence. Every word contributes to the purpose, with no redundancy or filler. It is front-loaded with the key action and result.

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 tool with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks detail. It does not specify the ordering of results, what 'detailed' includes (e.g., data vs. index size), or how it differs from similar tools. More context would improve completeness.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for all three parameters. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; for instance, it does not clarify what 'top' is sorted by (e.g., total space descending). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Get detailed disk space usage by table in a database' clearly states the verb 'get', the resource 'disk space usage by table', and the scope 'in a database'. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_database_info' or 'get_table_stats' which focus on different metrics.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_table_stats, get_index_usage). There is no mention of exclusions or prerequisites, leaving the agent without context for appropriate selection.

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