get_table_detail

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral transparency. It discloses the output (columns and DDL) and implies a read operation. It does not mention side effects, permissions, or performance, but for a read-only schema tool, this is adequate.

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 extremely concise: three sentences for purpose, three lines for arguments, one line for returns. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no superfluous text.

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 presence of an output schema (so return values are defined there), the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and parameter requirements. It could benefit from noting common prerequisites (e.g., prior login) but overall is sufficiently complete for a straightforward schema retrieval tool.

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 0%. The description adds minimal value: for instance_id, it adds '(must be logged in)'; for db_name and table_name, it merely restates the schema titles ('Database name', 'Table name'). Only one parameter gains useful semantic context.

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 tool's purpose: 'Get detailed schema of a table: columns and DDL (CREATE TABLE statement).' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like list_tables (which lists table names only) and 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?

The description implies usage context by noting 'instance_id (must be logged in)', which hints at a prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings or provide exclusion criteria. The purpose is clear enough for an agent to infer appropriate usage.

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