describe_table

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'show configured masks' but does not confirm read-only behavior, required permissions, or whether any side effects exist. The description lacks critical transparency for a tool that likely performs a read operation.

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 concise sentence that directly states the tool's function. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and every word is essential. No redundant or unnecessary information is present.

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 low complexity, the description fails to cover important contextual details. There is no indication of the return format (e.g., list of columns with types, mask details), error handling, or prerequisites. Given the absence of an output schema, the description should clarify what the agent can expect to receive.

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 100% description coverage for both parameters (schema and table). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's definitions, such as expected format or valid values. Therefore, it meets the baseline but provides no extra value.

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 purpose: to describe columns and show configured masks for a table. It uses specific verbs 'describe' and 'show' with resources 'columns' and 'masks'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_tables (which only lists table names) and explain_query (which explains queries).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_tables or run_readonly_query. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as requiring table read access, or context for when describing columns is appropriate.

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