get_table_columns

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It labels the operation as 'get' (read-only) but omits details like performance impact, required permissions, or whether the output is paginated. The minimal description leaves the agent uncertain about safety.

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 single sentence is concise and front-loaded. However, it could be slightly more descriptive without adding fluff. It earns its place but misses an opportunity to briefly clarify output.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should hint at what 'detailed column information' includes (e.g., data type, nullability). It fails to do so, leaving a significant gap for a tool that returns structured metadata.

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 100%, so the schema already documents 'database' and 'table'. The description adds no extra meaning to these parameters; it remains vague about how 'detailed column information' relates to the inputs. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 it gets 'detailed column information for a table', which is a specific verb+resource. While it differentiates from siblings like 'get_table_definition' (DDL) or 'get_view_columns' (view), it could explicitly contrast with these to achieve a perfect score.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_table_definition' or 'get_sample_data'. The agent has no criteria to prefer this tool over siblings.

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