bubble_get_schema

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the source endpoint and output content, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination, performance, or error conditions. This adds some value beyond annotations but not a rich depth of context.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or unrelated 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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, and strong annotations), the description is complete. It explains the purpose, the endpoint, and the content of the response, which is all the agent needs for a read-only schema retrieval.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to explain parameters. Per the rubric, zero-parameter tools receive a baseline of 4.

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 verb 'Retrieve', the resource 'full Bubble.io app schema', the source '/meta endpoint', and what it lists ('all data types and their fields'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like bubble_export_schema and bubble_schema_summary by specifying the endpoint and the exhaustive nature of the retrieval.

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 implies usage through its purpose statement (retrieve the full schema), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. The context is clear but lacks explicit guidance.

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