List Oracle tables

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clarifies that only table names are returned and not columns, and hints at read-only behavior, but it doesn't describe output format, sorting, pagination, or error/limits behavior.

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 short sentences front-load the core purpose and then provide a targeted usage note. There is no wasted wording; every sentence 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?

For a simple, optional-parameter enumeration tool with no output schema, this description covers the what, the scope, the filter mechanism, and the key distinction from describe_table. It could add return-format details or permission context, but the core invocation is adequately complete.

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 100% and both parameters are already documented clearly in the schema. The description paraphrases those meanings ('explicit OWNER', 'optionally filtered by a SQL LIKE pattern') without adding new details beyond the schema.

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?

Description states a specific verb and resource: 'Lists table names for the connected schema or an explicit OWNER'. It also differentiates itself from describe_table by noting 'it does not return columns'.

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?

Gives explicit usage direction: 'Call this before describe_table', making the workflow intentions clear. It does not address when to prefer list_tables over run_sql, but does provide useful context for the primary sibling.

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