seed_list_tables

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavioral traits. 'List' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose pagination behavior, return format, or any side effects. It adds minimal beyond the verb, though it does note the 'configured organization' context.

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 sentence of eight words, with no filler or redundant information. Every word contributes to stating the tool's purpose, making it highly concise and appropriately sized.

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's simplicity (two optional pagination parameters, no output schema), the description is arguably adequate but leaves ambiguous what 'table metadata' exactly includes and how pagination responses are structured. Additional context about the return payload or pagination behavior would improve completeness, but the current level is minimally viable.

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 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining or at least referencing the pagination parameters (pageSize, pageNumber). It does neither, leaving the parameters to be inferred from the schema alone. While the parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, the description adds no extra meaning.

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 'List Seed table metadata from the configured organization' uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Seed table metadata'), clearly distinguishing this from siblings like seed_get_table (single table) and seed_list_frames (frames). The added context of 'configured organization' further clarifies scope.

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 use case is implied by the name and description: a simple listing operation for tables. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as seed_get_table, nor any mention of exclusions or prerequisites.

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