List stored procedures

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, but the description adds substantial behavior beyond them: definition_visible=false and null metrics when text is hidden, referenced_object_count null when dependencies are unreadable, and SQL Server's silent omission of unauthorized procedures.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose and routing, then the caveats. Dense but every sentence carries information; the caveat sentence is long and could be split, but nothing is wasted.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description explains the returned complexity metrics and their null semantics, and covers the edge case of silently omitted procedures plus where to diagnose it. Nothing an agent needs to call or interpret this tool is missing.

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%, so both parameters (database, schema filter with default and example) are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level syntax or format detail, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Lists the user stored procedures') plus scope ('the login can see') and the extra data returned. It is clearly separable from the sibling get_procedure_definition, which it names.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it ('find procedures and pick the complex ones') and names the alternative for the other case ('for one procedure's text use get_procedure_definition'). It further routes the agent to get_database_overview and check_permissions for the silent-permission-omission situation.

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