get_database_schema

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It implies a read-only operation and lists return type, but it does not explicitly state that it has no side effects or mention error conditions. It is adequate but lacks explicit transparency about behavior.

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 concise, with a clear purpose statement, a usage hint, and structured Args/Returns sections. Every element serves a purpose with no wasted words.

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 (single optional parameter and output schema available), the description covers its main function adequately. It could elaborate on 'backend info' but overall provides sufficient context for an agent to use it.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description adds value by naming the parameter 'dataset' and providing an example ('mimic-iv'), which clarifies its purpose beyond the type definition in the schema.

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 clearly states it discovers available data and tables, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_table_info that focus on specific table details. The verb 'Discover' and resource 'database schema' are specific, but it lacks explicit differentiation from siblings.

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 'When to use' section advises starting here to understand tables, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives like get_table_info for deeper details.

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