get-schema-by-name

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It merely states 'Get database schema details' without disclosing what 'details' includes, whether it can return deleted schemas, authorization needs, or what the response looks like. The optional 'include' parameter is not mentioned.

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 that efficiently conveys the core purpose. Every word earns its place, though it could be slightly expanded with minimal extra phrasing to cover the optional parameters.

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?

Given the tool has 3 parameters (1 required), no output schema, and many sibling tools (including get-schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return format, the effect of optional parameters, or how to interpret results. Significant context is missing.

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 only 33% (only fqn has a description). The description adds meaning to fqn by mentioning 'fully qualified name', but does not explain 'fields' or 'include'. The enum for include is visible in schema but not clarified in the description.

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', resource 'database schema details', and method 'by fully qualified name'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get-schema' (which likely uses ID) and other 'get-by-name' tools, and the name itself reinforces the differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that listing schemas is done with list-schemas, or that create/update/delete have separate tools. No explicit when-not or alternative references.

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