uc_table_get

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so description does not need to restate safety. The description adds the HTTP method and path but no additional behavioral traits. With annotations present, this is adequate but does not go beyond.

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 very short (one sentence) but lacks detail for a tool with 6 parameters and low schema coverage. It is concise but at the expense of essential context. Could be improved without adding significant length.

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?

Despite having an output schema (context says true) and annotations covering safety, the tool has 6 parameters with low schema coverage and no usage guidance among many sibling tools. The description is incomplete for an agent to use effectively without additional context.

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 description coverage is low (17%) with only 'full_name' having a description. The tool description does not explain the five boolean parameters (include_delta_metadata, etc.) or their effect on the returned data. The description fails to add meaning for 5 out of 6 parameters, leaving the agent uninformed.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get a single table' and provides the API endpoint. However, it does not differentiate from other uc_table tools like uc_table_list or uc_table_get's own variants. The verb 'Get' is specific, but the resource could be more contextually distinguished among 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as uc_table_list for multiple tables. No mention of prerequisites or expected use cases. The agent is left to infer usage from the name and schema.

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