describe_procedure

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It implies a read operation but does not explicitly state that it is safe, non-destructive, or if any permissions are needed. No disclosure of side effects or return format.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. Could be slightly more informative, but appropriate for a simple tool. Front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 no output schema and 3 parameters, the description should specify what metadata is returned (e.g., parameter names, types). It only mentions 'parameter list and metadata' vaguely. Also fails to clarify the format of the 'procedure' parameter. Incomplete for practical use.

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 67%, with descriptions for 'database' and 'connection' but not for 'procedure'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it does not clarify what the 'procedure' parameter accepts (e.g., fully qualified name, case sensitivity).

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?

Description 'Parameter list and metadata for a stored procedure' clearly states the tool's output (parameter list and metadata) and resource (stored procedure). It distinguishes from siblings like list_procedures (which lists names) and show_create_procedure (which shows CREATE statement).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not specify that it is for getting detailed parameter info for a specific procedure, as opposed to list_procedures which gives an overview. Usage context is only implied.

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