list_decision_tables

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds no further behavioral context such as pagination behavior or return format, but does not contradict annotations. Since annotations carry the safety burden, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that states the verb, resource, and filters with zero fluff. It is concise and to the point.

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 simple list tool with read-only annotations and well-documented parameters, the description is complete. The limit parameter covers pagination, and the absence of an output schema is acceptable since the tool's return type is self-evident (a list). No critical information is missing.

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%, with each parameter (limit, query, active) having its own description. The tool description only summarizes 'filtered by name or active status', which adds no meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is correct.

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 action (List), the resource (Decision Builder decision tables), and the table name (sys_decision). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_decision_table (single record), list_decision_inputs (different resource), and create_decision_table (creation) by explicitly naming the target resource.

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 indicates optional filtering by name or active status, which tells when to apply those filters. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the distinct resource (decision tables) and the presence of sibling tools for inputs, answers, and publishing make the intended use clear without confusion.

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