List warehouse tables

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool lists all tables and views (a read-only operation) and includes row counts. It does not mention potential limitations like large result sets or ordering, but for a simple listing tool this is adequate.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with action, no fluff. Every sentence adds value: the first states what it does, the second advises when to use it.

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 parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It tells the agent to use it first for discovery. It could specify the return format (e.g., list of names with counts) but is sufficient for an effective choice.

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?

There are no parameters, so per guidelines baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter meaning as the schema is empty and coverage is 100%.

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 lists all tables and views in the warehouse with row counts, using a specific verb 'List' and resource 'tables and views'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like describe_table (describes a specific table) and query (queries 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 explicitly says 'Use this first to discover what data is available', giving a clear when-to-use instruction. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or provide alternatives, though context from siblings implies describe_table for specific tables.

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