list_schemas

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It describes the return value structure, indicating a read-like operation, but does not explicitly state idempotency, error handling, or side effects. The description adds moderate transparency but leaves gaps.

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 extremely concise, using a two-line summary followed by structured Args and Returns sections. Every sentence provides necessary information without redundancy. No extraneous content.

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 (list schemas), the description covers the key aspects: purpose, parameters with examples, and return structure. The output schema is described, so return values are clear. Missing details like error conditions or permission requirements are minor for a read-only listing tool.

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 0% description coverage for parameters. The description compensates by explaining catalog_name with examples ('iceberg_data', 'hive_data', 'tpch') and noting engine_id's source (list_engines). This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema, though no validation constraints are mentioned.

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 'List database schemas in a watsonx.data catalog,' specifying the verb (list) and resource (schemas). It provides parameter examples that reinforce the purpose. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this tool from siblings like list_tables or create_schema, though the action is distinct.

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 includes Args with examples and notes that engine_id comes from list_engines, implying a dependency. It does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., describe_table, list_tables) or when not to use it. The usage context is implied but not fully defined.

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