get_table_metadata

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'get' implying it is read-only, but does not explicitly confirm lack of side effects, permissions required, or error scenarios. For a retrieval operation, more transparency about safety would be beneficial.

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 concise and front-loaded with the purpose. The 'Args' and 'Returns' sections are helpful given the schema lacks descriptions, though they are somewhat redundant with the schema structure. No unnecessary 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?

Given the existence of an output schema, return values need not be explained. However, the description lacks context on usage constraints, such as whether the database and table must exist, or what happens if invalid IDs are provided. It is minimally complete for a simple getter but could be more thorough.

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 no descriptions for parameters, but the tool's description provides brief explanations: 'The ID of the database' and 'The ID of the table'. This adds meaning beyond the schema, compensating for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 metadata about a specific table including columns', which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_database' (gets database metadata) and 'get_card' (gets card metadata) by focusing on a table.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when-not-to-use, or how it differs from similar tools like 'list_tables' (which lists tables) or 'get_database' (database-level info).

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