d365fo_get_table_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It describes the tool as a read-only query returning detailed information, which is good, but it omits potential performance impacts, authorization requirements, or behavior on missing tables.

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 structured with bullet points and an Args section, making it easy to scan. It is front-loaded with the purpose. Though somewhat lengthy, every sentence adds value, so it is concise enough for the detail provided.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return value as a dictionary with listed categories. It covers the key aspects of table info. However, it lacks guidance on error handling (e.g., table not found) and could compare against sibling tools for completeness.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description compensates fully. It explains each parameter: table_name with an example, include_sample_data and include_relationships with their defaults and effects, and profile as optional. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema titles.

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 'Get detailed information about a specific database table' and lists specific aspects like column definitions, keys, indexes, statistics, and sample data. This distinguishes it from sibling tools such as d365fo_get_database_schema (which covers all tables) and d365fo_get_entity_schema (which focuses on entities).

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 explicitly says 'This tool is useful for exploring specific tables before writing queries,' providing clear context. However, it does not specify when not to use it or mention alternatives, though the sibling list implies alternatives exist.

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