list_tables_all

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action 'List' and the scope, but does not disclose whether it is read-only, whether system tables are included, performance implications of scanning all databases, or the return format. This is minimal beyond what the name implies.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and scope without unnecessary words. Every word adds value, making it concise and well-structured.

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 low-complexity tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers the essential context: what is listed and the optional filter. It could mention read-only nature or include system tables, but the description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema covers 100% of parameter documentation: databaseFilter includes a clear description ('Filter by database name (default: all databases)'). The description adds no further semantic detail beyond reinforcing the filter concept, but since the schema already provides sufficient meaning, a 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('all tables') with explicit scope ('across all databases or in a specific database'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_tables (which likely targets the current database). It unambiguously states what the tool does.

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 clearly conveys when to use this tool: when you need tables from all databases or a particular database. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the cross-database scope is implied as the differentiator from list_tables. There is no misleading guidance.

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