Find Unknown Columns In SQL

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

The description reveals that no SQL execution occurs, which is a key safety trait. However, with no annotations, the description fails to mention whether the tool has side effects, requires specific permissions, or has limitations. It provides some transparency but not enough for an agent to fully understand behavioral boundaries.

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 effective sentence that immediately conveys the core action and key differentiator (no SQL execution). No unnecessary words, and the structure is front-loaded with the purpose.

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?

With 6 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what 'candidates' means, how results are structured, or the role of parameters like 'schema' and 'profile'. The agent lacks sufficient context to use the tool effectively without additional clarification.

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?

Despite 6 parameters and 0% schema coverage, the description adds little meaning beyond parameter names. It explains 'sql' is the input SQL but does not clarify 'line', 'schema', 'profile', 'filePath', or 'maxCandidates'. An agent would have to guess the semantics, which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 finds unknown tables or columns in SQL and returns metadata-based candidates without executing the SQL. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like ob_explain or ob_find_columns that have overlapping but distinct 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 implies usage when SQL contains unknown references, but it does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent without clear guidance on when to choose this over similar tools like ob_explain_error or ob_find_columns.

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