list_tablesGet a detailed list of tables in a ClickHouse database, including engine, row count, and size. Provide the database name to view its schema.
List tables in a database with engine, row count, and size.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| database | Yes | Database name |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by specifying the returned attributes (engine, row count, size), which goes beyond the schema and helps set expectations. No contradictions or hidden side effects are implied.
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, efficient sentence that leads with the verb and includes the essential output details. There is no extraneous wording, and all information is 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?
For a simple listing tool, the description covers what is returned and the required input. It doesn't detail potential ordering, pagination, or error conditions, but these are minor omissions given the simplicity and the strong annotations. The description is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's core purpose.
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 coverage is 100%—the sole parameter 'database' is clearly described as 'Database name'. The tool description adds no additional meaning about the parameter itself, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate; the schema already handles parameter documentation.
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 states a clear verb ('List'), resource ('tables'), and the specific output fields (engine, row count, size). It naturally differentiates from siblings like list_databases (which lists databases) and describe_table (which focuses on a single table), so an agent can immediately determine what this tool offers.
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 it (to get an overview of tables in a database) but does not explicitly mention alternatives, conditions for choosing this tool over others, or any exclusions. With multiple sibling tools like describe_table and show_create_table, some guidance on when to prefer this one would help, but it's not misleading.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.