list_tables

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

No annotations provided, but description discloses that it provides 'a flattened view of all tables across all schemas' and mentions output fields (enabled status, sync mode, configuration). Does not mention error conditions but acceptable for a list operation.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, each sentence adds value without waste.

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?

For a list tool with one required parameter and an output schema, description covers all needed context: what is listed, scope, and usage suggestion.

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 already describes connection_id fully (100% coverage), description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'List' and resource 'all tables in a Fivetran connection with their sync status', and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_table_columns or get_table_status.

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?

Implied usage context: 'Useful for quickly seeing which tables are being synced.' Does not explicitly exclude alternatives but provides clear scope.

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