get_measurement_schema

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

With no annotations provided, the description is responsible for behavioral disclosure. It states it 'Shows column names, types, and categories' which implies a read-only operation, and adds the behavioral nuance of returning schema for 'all versions'. However, it does not mention potential errors, pagination, or limits, leaving some gaps.

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 compact, two sentences long, and front-loads the action ('Get the schema...'). Every word adds value, with no filler or repetition.

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 simple read-only schema retrieval tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the return value fields (column names, types, categories) and version scope. It could be enhanced by clarifying the relationship to similar sibling tools, but overall it is sufficiently complete.

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 100% (both 'database' and 'measurement' have clear descriptions). The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 the verb 'Get' and the specific resource: the schema (column information) for a specific measurement/table. It further details what is shown (column names, types, categories) and includes the scope '(all versions)', distinguishing it from a simple 'describe' 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?

The usage is implied: use this tool to retrieve schema information for a measurement. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this vs. similar siblings like 'describe_table' or 'list_tables', and no mention of alternatives or exclusions.

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