mysql_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, yet it says nothing about read-only safety, default pagination (limit defaults to 50), or the fact that results may be truncated at 200. For a listing tool whose output can be silently bounded, that omission matters.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It is tight and immediately readable, which is the one dimension where this definition performs well.

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 tool with three undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, one sentence is not enough. Pagination behavior, filtering, and the shape of the returned list are all left to inference.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% across three parameters, and the description does not mention limit, offset, or keyword at all. The keyword filter in particular is entirely undiscoverable from the definition text, so an agent may never learn it can filter results.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('tables and views') with scope ('in the configured database'). It is distinguishable from mysql_describe_table and mysql_list_indexes, but it never explicitly names those siblings or contrasts its role with them.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as mysql_describe_table or mysql_query. The agent must infer from the name alone that this is the discovery step before describing or querying a table.

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