Get Table DDL

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions 'allowed' but does not explain access control. It does not disclose if the tool is read-only, whether it requires special permissions, or how output formatting differs between 'native' and 'structured'.

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 sentence, which is concise but lacks structured formatting (e.g., bullet points). It is not verbose, but could be more informative without becoming long.

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 no output schema, 4 parameters with 0% coverage, and 62 sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return format, the distinction between native vs structured DDL, or how parameters affect output. Also missing any example or error conditions.

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 description coverage is 0%. Description adds no meaning to parameters (table, schema, profile, maxColumns). For example, it does not clarify what 'profile' or 'maxColumns' controls or how 'schema' differs from the table's 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 specifies the action ('Return') and resource ('DDL metadata for an allowed OceanBase table'), clearly distinguishing this from siblings like ob_describe_table or ob_get_table_schema. The title also reinforces the purpose.

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. It does not explain what 'native or structured' means or when each format is appropriate. Siblings are numerous but no differentiation provided.

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