schema_analyze

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool parses SQL and generates a Mermaid ER diagram, implying a read-only analytical operation with no side effects. It does not discuss error handling or dialect support, but the core behavior is transparent.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and explicit output. No wasted words.

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?

The tool has a single parameter and no output schema. The description explains the main outputs (extracted schema elements and a Mermaid diagram), but it does not specify the exact response structure or whether both outputs are returned together. There is also no mention of error handling or edge cases, which is a gap for a tool that parses user-provided SQL.

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 fully documents the 'sql' parameter with a description that already states it contains CREATE TABLE statements and can include multiple tables. The tool description adds context about what will be extracted but does not provide additional semantic details about the parameter itself (e.g., format constraints, limits).

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 uses a specific verb ('Parse') with a clear resource ('CREATE TABLE statements') and explicitly lists the extracted entities (tables, columns, types, constraints, foreign keys, indexes) and the generated output (Mermaid ER diagram). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like sql_format or query_build, which serve different purposes.

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 clearly states what the tool does, making it obvious when to use it (when schema analysis of CREATE TABLE statements is needed). However, it does not explicitly contrast it with sibling tools or state when not to use it, so it falls short of a perfect 5.

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