Row list row count

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a safe read operation, and the description adds the behavioral detail that the result is returned as text. However, it does not disclose potential edge cases such as behavior when the rowlist does not exist or whether the operation could be slow. Given the annotation coverage, the additional context is minimal but acceptable.

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 sentence that immediately states the verb, resource, and output format. It contains no filler or redundancy, making it exceptionally concise and well-structured.

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 simple read-only row count tool, the description is adequate but not complete. It lacks guidance on how to discover rowlist names (e.g., via banana_rowlist_names) and does not mention error handling. With no output schema, the explicit 'as text' return detail helps, but the tool remains minimally specified.

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 provides complete descriptions (100% coverage) for all three parameters doc, table, and rowlist, so the description does not need to add parameter details. The description offers no extra semantics beyond what the schema already supplies, matching the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 returns the number of rows in a named row list of a table, using the specific verb 'Return' and resource 'named row list of a table'. It is unambiguous and distinctly different from sibling tools like banana_table_rowcount, though it does not explicitly call out the difference.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as banana_table_rowcount or banana_rowlist_names. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and schema alone.

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