ncloud_datacatalog_get_table_schema

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to reiterate safety. However, the description omits behavioral details like pagination support (pageNo, pageSize) or error handling, which are important for correct usage.

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, concise sentence of 8 words that directly conveys the tool's purpose. No wasted words, perfectly front-loaded.

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 description is too brief for a tool with pagination parameters and no output schema. It does not explain the return format (list of columns with name/type/description) or mention that results may be paginated. This lack of detail could lead to incomplete understanding.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds no extra parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline expectation. No improvement or degradation.

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 action (Get), resource (table schema), and output (column names, types, descriptions). It is specific and matches the tool name. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_table_schema_and_partition_keys, which could cause confusion.

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, such as get_table_schema_and_partition_keys or get_table. Given many similar data catalog tools, explicit usage context is missing.

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