get_table_fields

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions truncation behavior ('truncated if necessary') but lacks details on error handling, permissions, or rate limits. As a read operation, minimal behavioral disclosure is given.

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 extremely concise with two short paragraphs and structured Args/Returns. Every sentence contributes value, no redundancy or fluff.

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 an output schema, so return values need less explanation. However, given the number of siblings (21) and lack of usage guidelines, the description is adequate but not comprehensive. It covers basic functionality and truncation but misses selection context.

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 0%, but the description clarifies limit as 'Maximum number of fields to return (default: 20)' and table_id as 'The ID of the table.' This adds minimal meaning beyond the schema types and defaults, partially compensating for low coverage.

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 tool returns all fields/columns in a specific table, using specific verbs and resources. It distinguishes from siblings like get_schema_tables and list_tables which operate at table or database level.

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 vs alternatives such as get_schema_tables or list_tables. The description does not mention contexts, prerequisites, or conditions for appropriate use.

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