list_schemas

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool lists schemas, requires a connection, and allows temporary overrides. It does not mention security or performance, but for a read-only listing these are less critical. The inclusion of the includeSystemSchemas parameter downstream adds transparency.

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 with front-loaded purpose and key usage conditions. No extraneous information. Every sentence contributes to understanding.

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 schema covers params and there is no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It could mention the default filtering of system schemas or the return format, but the presence of the includeSystemSchemas param and the listing nature makes it adequate.

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 100% description coverage. The description adds value by explaining that server, database, and schema params are for one-time overrides without changing the main connection, which is not evident from schema descriptions alone.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'schemas in the current database'. It differentiates from sibling tools like list_databases and list_objects by specifying the target is schemas, and mentions the one-time override params that are unique to this tool.

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 states the prerequisite 'Requires active connection (use switch_server_db first)' and explains when to use the optional override params for one-time execution. It does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use, but the context is clear and actionable.

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