mysql_get_all_schemas

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral burden. It does not disclose that this is a read-only operation, potential permission requirements, or behavior when no tables exist. It only states the basic action, which is insufficient for full transparency.

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 one concise sentence that directly states the tool's function. It is well-structured and front-loaded, though it could include more context without becoming verbose.

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 with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description explains the core functionality but does not specify the return format, error handling, or behavior when no tables exist. Given low complexity, this is acceptable but not complete.

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 only parameter 'alias' is fully documented in the input schema. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 (Get) and resource (CREATE TABLE statements for all tables in the current database). It distinguishes from sibling tools like mysql_show_tables (which lists table names) and mysql_describe_table (single table). However, the tool name 'all_schemas' vs 'all tables' creates minor ambiguity, so not a 5.

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 use when you need DDL for all tables, but does not explicitly state when this tool is preferred over alternatives like mysql_show_tables or mysql_describe_table. It lacks exclusionary guidance.

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