list_objects

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the parameters and return type (list of names) and that filter is case-insensitive regex. It lacks explicit statements about side effects or idempotency, but the operation is clearly read-only, and the description is fairly transparent.

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, concise paragraph with no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose, then dives into parameter details, and ends with actionable guidance on using the results. Every sentence earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return format (list of names) and suggests downstream tools. Parameters are fully described. There are no obvious gaps for a list tool, making it contextually complete.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must fully explain each parameter. It does: 'database' is a key from list_databases, 'type' accepts 'tables', 'views', or 'all', and 'filter' is an optional case-insensitive regex. All three parameters are adequately described.

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 action ('List') and resource ('user tables, views, or both in a Firebird database'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'describe_table' (describes a specific table) or 'list_procedures' (lists procedures).

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 tells when to use it (to list database objects) and suggests how to use the results (pass to other tools). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it versus alternatives, such as using 'list_databases' to list databases first.

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