Discover schema

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool produces heuristic labels, which is a behavioral trait, and 'keşfi' (discovery) suggests a read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly state safety (no side effects), whether an active connection is required, or any limitations. Some useful context is provided, but significant gaps remain.

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?

A single concise sentence in Turkish that conveys the main purpose and output labels. No redundant information, perfectly scoped for a zero-parameter tool.

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?

The tool is simple with zero parameters and no output schema, but the description only partially explains the return value (tables/columns and heuristic labels). It lacks details about the exact result structure, any expected database state, and how this tool fits into a workflow with siblings. However, it covers the essentials for a schema discovery tool.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema already covers everything. The description adds no parameter semantics because there are none; per the rubric, 0 parameters yields a baseline of 4.

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 tool performs table/column discovery and outputs heuristic labels (date_cols, measures, dims). It is distinct from sibling tools connect_db and run_sql_safe, which handle connection and query execution, respectively.

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 description implies a use case for exploring database schema but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. The sibling names provide some context, but the description itself offers no explicit usage guidance.

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