get_table_fields

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses truncation behavior ('truncated if necessary') but does not mention error conditions, authorization needs, or performance implications. Adequate but incomplete for a read operation without annotations.

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?

Three short, clear sentences with bullet-like arg descriptions. No fluff, but the arg section could be condensed into a single sentence while retaining clarity.

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?

Despite existence of output schema (not shown), description provides only vague return info: 'Dictionary with field metadata, truncated if necessary'. In a low-complexity tool, this is adequate but could specify keys like 'name', 'type' etc.

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 has 0% description coverage, so description adds essential meaning: table_id is 'ID of the table', limit is 'Maximum number of fields to return (default: 20)'. This compensates well for the schema gap.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get all fields/columns in a specific table', using specific verb ('Get') and resource ('fields/columns in a specific table'), effectively distinguishing from sibling tools like 'list_tables' or 'list_databases'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any conditions for use. Usage is implied for retrieving table column metadata, but lacking directives like 'Use this instead of list_tables when you need column details'.

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