get_view

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It states the tool is read-only ('Fetch'), but does not mention authentication needs, rate limits, or any side effects. More detail is expected for a tool with no annotations.

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 short and front-loaded with the main action. The Args section is clearly structured. However, it could be slightly more efficient by integrating the parameter descriptions directly.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown), the description need not detail return values. However, the lack of behavioral information and usage guidance leaves the tool less complete than it could be for a standalone description.

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?

Although the input schema has no descriptions and schema coverage is reported as 0%, the description's Args section provides meaningful explanations for each parameter: purpose and expected format (e.g., 'Dot-separated qualified view name, e.g. dbo.vw_sales'). This adds significant value beyond the schema.

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 fetches the full definition of a view with 'Fetch the full definition of a view'. The verb+resource is specific, but it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'read_view' which likely returns view data.

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 like 'read_view' or 'list_views'. The description lacks usage context such as prerequisites or typical scenarios.

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