describe_table

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions the return of metadata and a vague scope ('one configured database'), without addressing read-only status, error handling, or permissions. The phrase is ambiguous and does not clarify the role of the optional database parameter.

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 sentence, succinct and front-loaded with the core action. It contains no filler.

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?

While the output schema exists and the tool is simple, the description leaves ambiguity about the database scope and parameter usage. It is marginally adequate but lacks important context for an agent to invoke it confidently.

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?

Parameter documentation coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the `table` and `database` parameters. It fails to mention required/optional status, formats, or defaults, which the schema alone must convey.

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 states 'Return column metadata for a table', clearly identifying a specific verb (return) and resource (column metadata). The scope 'in one configured database' distinguishes this from sibling tools that list databases or perform data operations.

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 explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, use cases, or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer context.

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