list_tables

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

Without annotations, the description discloses the scope limitation (only visible tables) and the output content (row counts, comments), which is adequate for a read-only list operation.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the main action and followed by a key constraint, with no wasted words.

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?

The description is complete for a parameterless list tool: it explains what it does, what it returns (estimated row counts, comments), and a critical limitation (visibility under access policy). No output schema 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?

With zero parameters, baseline is 4. The description adds value by describing the output (row counts, comments), compensating for the lack of parameters.

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 it lists tables visible under the access policy with row counts and comments, and distinguishes from sibling tools like describe_table which focuses on a single table.

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?

It explains that only tables within the access policy are listed and those outside cannot be queried, providing context for when to use this tool, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it.

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