base_saveDDL

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

The description states the tool saves a file on disk, which is a write operation, but annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. This is a direct contradiction, severely misleading the agent about the tool's side effects.

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 well-structured: it starts with purpose, then provides explicit usage guidelines, then lists arguments with descriptions, and ends with a mention of the return type. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

The description covers purpose, usage, and parameters adequately given the lack of output schema. However, the contradiction with annotations undermines completeness, as the agent cannot trust the behavioral description. Additionally, the return format is vaguely described.

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 0%, but the description provides clear explanations for all four parameters, including examples, defaults, and acceptable values for object_type. It adds significant meaning beyond the schema, though lacks details like format constraints.

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 extracts DDL for Teradata objects and saves it as a .sql file. It distinguishes from sibling base_tableDDL which displays DDL without saving. The verb 'save' and resource 'DDL' are specific.

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 tells the agent when to use this tool: only when the user wants to export, write, download, or persist DDL. It also specifies when NOT to use it and directs to base_tableDDL for display purposes. This is excellent guidance.

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