load_database_schema

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description does not explain what happens when the diagram already exists or whether tables are merged or replaced. The openWorldHint and idempotentHint are not addressed, leaving behavioral expectations unclear.

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, compact sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the action and target, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Despite having an output schema and annotations, the description is too sparse for a tool with five parameters and filtering options. It omits critical context about how tables are selected, whether the diagram is overwritten, and what the output represents, making it incomplete for reliable tool selection and invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description carries full responsibility for explaining parameters, but it only hints at 'live relational database schema' and 'named diagram'. No detail is given for url, schema, exclude_tables, or include_tables, leaving the agent without guidance on how to fill these fields.

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's function: loading a live relational database schema into a named diagram. The phrase 'live relational database schema' distinguishes it from sibling tools like load_ddl_schema and load_spec_schema, which import from static files or specifications.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as needing a database URL or credentials, nor any indication of when load_ddl_schema or load_spec_schema would be more appropriate.

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