show_functions

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

With no annotations provided, the description must reveal behavioral traits. It mentions 'safe operation' and not being affected by MCP safe mode, which adds transparency. However, it does not disclose other traits like side effects, idempotency, or performance implications. The description adds moderate value beyond the schema.

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 concise, with two sentences plus structured 'Args:' and 'Returns:' sections. It is well-organized and front-loaded with the key purpose. Every element serves a purpose without unnecessary verbosity.

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 (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description provides sufficient context: purpose, parameter explanation with example, and return type. It covers the key aspects an agent needs to 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 input schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the filter parameter with an example ('name like 'add%''), which adds meaning beyond the schema's type definition. This is helpful for an AI agent to understand how to construct the filter string.

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 'List available Databend functions', specifying the resource (functions) and action (list). It distinguishes from sibling tools like show_databases or show_tables by focusing on functions. The addition of 'safe operation, not affected by MCP safe mode' provides extra context, though the kind of functions (system vs. user-defined) is not specified.

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 implies when to use this tool via 'safe operation' and 'not affected by MCP safe mode', hinting that other tools may be unsafe in certain modes, but it does not explicitly state when to use this vs. alternatives or when not to use it. No sibling differentiation is provided beyond the resource type.

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