List tables

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It states the tool lists tables and views, but does not explicitly mention read-only nature, lack of side effects, or the return format. This is minimal behavioral information for a tool with no annotation support.

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, focused sentence that leads with the verb and directly states the tool's action. There is no wasted wording or redundancy, making it highly 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally sufficient but lacks explicit details about the return value (e.g., table names only, inclusion of schemas) and how the 'database' parameter affects results. While not incomplete, it does not fully cover the operation without schema/annotation support.

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 already fully describes the single optional 'database' parameter (100% coverage), including its meaning and default behavior. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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: to list all tables and views in the database. It uses a specific verb 'List' and a specific resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like describe_table (which describes a specific table) and query (which runs queries).

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?

No explicit usage guidance is given. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide hints about when it's appropriate (e.g., discovering available tables). The only context is the parameter description referencing list_databases, which is indirect.

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