getTableSchema

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosure. It indicates a read-only operation ('Get') and specifies the type of information returned, but it does not explicitly state that no data is modified or disclose any permissions, rate limits, or error behavior. For a schema lookup tool, this is adequate but not deeply transparent.

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 sentences, each contributing a distinct purpose: the first states the operation, the second provides usage context, and the third emphasizes importance. No redundancy or padding.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides enough to understand the purpose and when to use it. It mentions the kind of details returned and references other tools (via param schema). It could explicitly describe the output format, but given its simplicity, it is largely 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the tableName parameter. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it only reinforces the usage context already present in the parameter 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 uses a specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'detailed schema information for a specific table' and enumerates the content (field names, types, relationships). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like listTables (listing tables) and query/queryTable (querying data).

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Use this to understand table structure before querying or to identify available fields for filtering/sorting.' It also mentions 'Essential for building correct GraphQL queries.' This gives clear context, though it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or exclusions. The param schema adds 'use listTables first.'

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