Describe a view

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

Annotations already declare the operation as read-only and idempotent. The description adds that it queries system views SYS.VIEWS and SYS.VIEW_COLUMNS, which provides some context about the data source. However, it does not disclose potential permission requirements or limitations, which would add further transparency.

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 a single, focused sentence that directly conveys the tool's function without any redundant information. It is front-loaded and appropriately concise.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, good annotations, and full schema coverage, the description is reasonably complete. It mentions both the SQL definition and column metadata, covering the expected output. However, there is no output schema, and the description does not specify the exact return structure, which leaves a small gap.

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 the parameters are already fully documented. The description does not add additional meaning or context beyond the schema. It describes the overall purpose without detailing parameter-specific behavior or usage.

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 returns the view definition (SQL) and column metadata, specifically from SYS.VIEWS and SYS.VIEW_COLUMNS. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like hana_describe_table or hana_describe_procedure, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions. However, the tool name and title imply usage for describing a view, so the context is indirectly clear. No alternative tools are referenced.

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