dba_tableSqlList

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It explains the three parameters, including the conditional action of the 'persist' parameter (materializing results). However, it does not state whether the operation is read-only or any side effects, but the core behavior is clear.

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: one introductory sentence followed by a bullet-style list of arguments. Every sentence provides necessary information without waste, and the key purpose is front-loaded.

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?

The tool has no output schema and the description does not explain the return format in the non-persist case (presumably a list of SQL strings). The persist case is partially explained, but overall the description leaves ambiguity about the output structure, which is a gap for completeness.

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 100%, so the input schema already describes all parameters fully. The description restates these descriptions without adding new meaning, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 function: 'Get a list of SQL run against a table in the last number of days.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('list of SQL run against a table'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like dba_userSqlList.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., dba_userSqlList). It implies use for searching SQL by table and time range, but lacks when-not-to-use or clear context.

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