get_table_schema

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

The description details the return value (dict with success, message, schema) and the frictionless format. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or safe, though inferred. No annotations are present to contradict.

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 efficiently structured with sections for prerequisites, workflow, see also, args, and returns. Every sentence serves a purpose; no 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (2 required params, no annotations), the description fully covers how to use it, prerequisites, and the return format. The presence of an output schema is acknowledged in the description.

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 (0% coverage). The description adds clear explanations for both parameters: 'doc_id: L'ID du document' and 'table_id: L'ID de la table', which compensates for the schema gaps.

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 action 'obtient le schéma détaillé' and the resource 'table Grist'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tool 'list_columns' which provides a simpler list.

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?

Prerequisites are specified (use list_tables first) and a typical workflow is provided. The 'Voir aussi' section explicitly directs to an alternative tool for simpler needs.

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