get_collection_schema

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates that this is a safe read operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that: no indication of return format, error behavior, required permissions, or how the schema is structured. Since annotations cover only safety, the description carries little additional transparency value.

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 filler. For a simple one-parameter tool, this is appropriately sized and immediately communicates the action and target.

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 simple read-only getter with one parameter and readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, the description is functional but minimal. The lack of an output schema means the agent gets no guidance on the response shape, and the term 'schema' is not elaborated, which could cause ambiguity with related schema-analysis tools.

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 description covers 100% of the single parameter with 'Collection name,' and the description text adds no additional semantic detail. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema already fully documents the parameter.

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 verb 'get' and the resource 'schema for a specific collection,' making the core purpose understandable. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like list_collections or analyze_collection_schema, though 'specific collection' narrows the scope.

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 phrase 'for a specific collection' implies this tool is for retrieving a single collection's schema rather than listing all collections. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this over related siblings such as analyze_collection_schema or validate_collection_schema.

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