get_connection_schema

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the transparency burden. The verb 'get' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly state that there are no side effects, nor does it mention any special behaviors like pagination or error conditions. It is adequate but lacks explicit behavioral disclosure.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and object, followed by specifics. There is no wasted or redundant wording.

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?

For a simple get tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the return content (schemas, tables, columns, enabled/disabled state). It lacks details on output format or error handling, but for a read-only schema lookup this is acceptable.

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% (connection_id is described as 'The connection ID'), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides; it only contextualizes that the schema is for a connection.

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 gets the schema configuration for a connection, specifying the contents (schemas, tables, columns, enabled/disabled state). This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like get_connection_details (connection metadata) and reload_schema (refetching schema).

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 usage: use this when you need to view a connection's schema configuration. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when not to use it, such as distinguishing from get_connection_details or update_connection_schema.

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