Get Table Schema

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'policy-filtered', which indicates output respects access policies, but does not explain implications, permissions, or error handling. This is minimal value beyond the name.

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 that directly states the core function. It is efficient and front-loaded, but could include more detail without being redundant. Still, it avoids verbosity.

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?

For a tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return format, the meaning of 'policy-filtered', or the purpose of optional parameters. Significant gaps remain.

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%, so the description should compensate. It only implies the 'table' parameter via 'one table', but 'schema' and 'profile' are not explained. The description adds almost no semantic meaning beyond the parameter names themselves.

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 table columns and types, with a specific verb ('return') and resource ('table columns and types'). It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning 'policy-filtered' and 'one table', which is not indicated in similar tools like ob_describe_table or ob_list_tables.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling tools are listed but there is no advice on context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer purpose from the name and description alone.

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