explore_table

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only lists components without revealing side effects, required permissions, or whether the tool is read-only. The lack of detail leaves the agent uncertain about operational implications.

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 very concise, consisting of a single phrase. It is front-loaded with the key word 'Composite'. However, it may be too terse for full understanding, but within its brevity, it is efficient and contains no redundant information.

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 4 parameters (one required), the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain the order or format of the returned composite data, pagination, or how to interpret the results, leaving the agent with significant ambiguity.

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 description does not mention any parameters or add meaning beyond the input schema. Schema coverage is 50% (database and connection have descriptions, table and sampleSize do not). The description fails to compensate for the undocumented parameters, leaving the agent without guidance on how to use 'table' or 'sampleSize'.

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 'Composite: columns, indexes, foreign keys, stats, and sample rows' clearly states the tool returns a composite of multiple table aspects. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'describe_table' or 'sample_rows', though it could be more explicit that it retrieves all these elements in one call.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'describe_table' or 'sample_rows'. The description implies it is a comprehensive exploration, but it does not specify any conditions, exclusions, or prerequisites.

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