security_list_policies

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

The description only says 'list' which implies a read-only operation, but it does not disclose any behavioral details such as return format, authentication requirements, or behavior for non-existent tables. With no annotations, the description carries the burden and falls short.

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 that uses concise, direct language, with the key action and object front-loaded.

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?

With no output schema, the description should explain what the returned policy list looks like, but it does not. It also lacks context about errors or edge cases, making it incomplete for an agent.

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 single parameter table_name is already fully described in the schema with the same wording, so the description adds no extra meaning. Schema coverage is 100%, so a baseline score of 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 specifies the verb 'list' and the resource 'policies' scoped to a table, clearly distinguishing it from sibling security tools that create, drop, check, or test policies.

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 other security tools, nor any mention of prerequisites or related operations.

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