schema_explorer_cleanup_scan

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

readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, and the description adds genuinely new behavior: tables used/created recently are 'flagged as risky,' and save persists settings to ~/.singlestore-mcp/cleanup.json. It still does not describe the return shape (e.g., list of table names vs. a report), but for an annotated read-only tool this is useful added context.

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?

Front-loaded one-sentence purpose followed by a compact per-parameter list; each line carries parameter meaning rather than filler. The 'Args:' docstring style is slightly awkward but not wasteful.

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?

With no output schema, the description should say what the scan returns, and it only hints at 'risky' flags without describing the result structure or how the two age filters combine. Everything needed to invoke it correctly is present, but the read side is under-specified.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden, and it largely succeeds: it documents the pattern object shape ('{"pattern": "_dm*", "kind": "SAS DM"}'), shell-style case-insensitive matching, the omit-for-saved default, and the persistence path for save. The rough edge is that 'kind' is never explained and the interaction between older_than_days and recent_days is only loosely described.

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 and resource: 'Find leftover work tables by name pattern (and age), for the Schema Explorer's Clean-up panel.' An agent can tell this is the discovery/scan step of the clean-up flow. It does not explicitly disambiguate itself from sibling tools like schema_explorer_cleanup_drop or cleanup_work_tables, but the verb 'Find' implies non-destructive scanning.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: it belongs to the Clean-up panel and 'Omit for the saved ones' tells the agent when to leave patterns out. There is no explicit when-not or comparison to alternative siblings (e.g., schema_explorer_cleanup_settings, cleanup_work_tables, schema_explorer_cleanup_drop).

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