List foreign keys on a table

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds meaningful context by specifying the source system view (SYS.REFERENTIAL_CONSTRAINTS) and the output content (column, referenced table/column, delete rule), which is useful beyond the annotations.

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, well-structured sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource, and it includes essential output details without any unnecessary words 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?

While there is no output schema, the description lists the key output fields (column, referenced table/column, delete rule). Combined with the complete input schema and clear annotations, the description is mostly complete for a simple read-only listing tool, though it could briefly note that results are empty if no FKs exist.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all three parameters, including schema_name default and catalog_database purpose. The description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score 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?

The description clearly states the tool lists referential constraints (foreign keys) with column, referenced table/column, and delete rule, sourced from SYS.REFERENTIAL_CONSTRAINTS. This is specific and actionable, but it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool hana_list_constraints, which may cover a broader scope.

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 intended use is implied: to list foreign keys on a table. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like hana_list_constraints or hana_describe_table, nor any mention of prerequisites or schema defaults beyond what the input schema provides.

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