mysql_describe_table

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states a generic outcome. It does not clarify what 'structure' includes (e.g., columns, types, indexes, constraints), whether it uses SHOW CREATE TABLE or DESCRIBE, or any side effects. The tool appears to be read-only, but this is not explicitly stated.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool and immediately conveys the core 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?

The tool is simple, and the schema fully documents its parameters. However, there is no output schema, and the description does not explain what structure information is returned (e.g., column names, data types, keys). For an agent selecting this tool, knowing the return format would be valuable, so completeness is moderate.

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?

The schema covers both parameters (alias and table_name) with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides. It does not explain the relationship between alias and table_name or provide examples.

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 'Describe the structure of a MySQL table' uses a specific verb ('Describe') and resource ('MySQL table'), clearly stating the tool's purpose. It is not a tautology and is concise, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like mysql_get_schema, which may also describe table structures.

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. The description does not mention when to prefer mysql_describe_table over mysql_get_schema, mysql_show_tables, or mysql_list_indexes. There are no usage scenarios or exclusions.

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