Get Foreign Keys

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the source (INFORMATION_SCHEMA) and the purpose, which is useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. It does not mention performance or failure modes, but given the annotations' strength, this is acceptable.

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 two sentences with zero waste. The primary action is front-loaded, followed by usage guidance and an alternative. Every word earns its place.

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, all parameters are documented in the schema, and an output schema exists (so return format is not the description's responsibility). The description provides sufficient context for an agent to call the tool correctly without missing information.

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%, so all three parameters (table, profile, magentoRoot) already have descriptions that explain their meaning and defaults. The description adds no extra parameter context, so with high coverage the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('foreign key relationships for a table') and names the source ('from INFORMATION_SCHEMA'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like describe_table and get_table_indexes, so an agent knows exactly what this tool does.

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?

Explicitly instructs when to use: 'Use before writing JOINs to understand referential links.' It also names the alternative for column details ('Use describe_table'), making the decision between tools unambiguous.

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