describe_table

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation is read-only, that sensitive columns may be redacted, and that only allowlisted tables are accessible. These are meaningful behavioral traits that go beyond a simple 'describe' statement.

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 three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose followed by two concise caveats. No wasted words.

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 clearly lists the returned metadata (columns, types, nullability, key metadata) and covers key behavioral caveats (redaction, read-only, allowlisting). It omits details like error behavior or permission enforcement, but for a simple describe tool, it is fairly complete.

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 two parameters (schema, table) have no descriptions in the schema, and the description's only mention is 'single allowlisted MySQL table', which does not clarify what the schema parameter represents or how the two parameters relate. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining each parameter, but it does not.

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 action (describe), the target (a single allowlisted MySQL table), and the specific metadata returned (columns, types, nullability, and key metadata). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_tables (listing tables) and get_rows (retrieving rows).

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 when to use the tool (to get schema details for one table) via the word 'single', but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. No 'use this instead of X' guidance is provided, though the purpose statement makes the context clear.

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