ListTables

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only states it queries a list, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't mention any behavioral traits such as pagination behavior (implied by parameters but not described), rate limits, authentication needs, or what the output looks like. It lacks details on what 'data map' means or any constraints on the query.

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 a single, concise sentence in Chinese with no wasted words. It's front-loaded and to the point, though it could be more informative. The brevity is appropriate but borders on under-specification.

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 tool has 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the purpose beyond the name, lacks usage context, and fails to describe behavioral aspects or output format. For a list tool with multiple filtering and pagination parameters, more context is needed to guide effective use.

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 documents all 8 parameters thoroughly with descriptions, examples, and constraints. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, as it doesn't reference any parameters or provide context for their use. Baseline is 3 when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 '查询数据地图数据表列表' (Query data map table list) is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'ListTables' in Chinese. It provides the basic verb 'query' and resource 'table list', but lacks specificity about what kind of tables or context. It doesn't distinguish this tool from other list tools like ListDatabases, ListSchemas, or ListTasks in the sibling tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention any prerequisites, context, or exclusions. Given the sibling tools include other list operations (e.g., ListDatabases, ListSchemas), there's no indication of how this tool fits into a hierarchy or when it should be selected over others.

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