List tables

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden. It notes the path constraint but does not disclose error handling (e.g., if file not found), whether it is read-only, or the output format (just names). More detail would improve transparency.

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?

Two sentences with no redundant information. The purpose is stated first, followed by a necessary constraint. Every word earns its place.

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 required parameter, no output schema), the description is largely complete. It could mention potential errors or what happens with invalid paths, but the basic functionality is covered.

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 provides 100% coverage for the single parameter, and the description adds the critical context that the path must be absolute. This adds meaning beyond the schema's 'Absolute path to the SQLite database file.'

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 the tool lists names of tables and views in a SQLite database. It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('tables and views'), and the sibling tools ('describe_table', 'query') indicate distinct purposes.

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 implicitly guides usage by specifying the 'path' must be an absolute filesystem path. It doesn't explicitly state when to use vs siblings, but the tool's purpose of listing tables is distinct from describing a table or querying.

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