List tables

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the core action ('List all table names') without additional details such as whether authentication is required, whether it is a read-only operation, or any potential side effects. The description adds no behavioral context beyond what the name and title already convey.

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, short sentence ('List all table names.') that directly and efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. There is no wasted wording, and it is immediately understandable.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description provides the essential information: it lists table names. While it does not explicitly state the return format (e.g., array of strings), the phrase 'List all table names' strongly implies the output. The description is adequate for this basic tool, though a slight enhancement could note the output type or any filtering absence.

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 has zero parameters, so schema description coverage is 100% vacuously. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description appropriately matches the parameterless nature without causing confusion.

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 'List all table names' uses a specific verb ('List') and clearly identifies the resource ('table names') with a clear scope ('all'). It distinguishes this tool from the sibling 'query' by indicating it lists table names rather than 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With a sibling tool 'query' present, there is no mention of which operation would be appropriate for different scenarios. The description simply states the function without any usage context or exclusions.

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