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

Annotations already mark this as read-only, and the description agrees, adding no contradiction. It adds useful detail that results include column info, but does not mention pagination, size limits, or other behavioral traits. With good annotation coverage, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb 'List', and no wasted words. It conveys the scope and extra information ('with column info') efficiently.

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 parameterless list tool, the description covers what it lists and the extra column info. There is no output schema, but the tool is simple enough that this is adequate. It does not describe return shape or limits, but no alternatives are needed given the simplicity.

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 input schema is empty, so there are zero parameters. Per the rubric, zero parameters earns a baseline of 4. The description adds no parameter details because none exist.

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 the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'tables' and scopes it to 'your business system', additionally noting 'column info' distinguishes it from sibling tools like table_create, template_list, and views_list. This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 this is the tool for enumerating tables ('List all tables'), giving clear context that there are no exclusions. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but sibling names (e.g., table_create, views_list) make the intended use obvious.

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