List tables

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already signals this is a safe read operation. The description adds scope ('every table') and output detail ('with its row count'), which is useful. However, it does not disclose potential performance implications of counting rows across all tables, or whether any filtering/sorting is applied. With annotations covering safety, this is adequate but not rich.

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 two sentences, immediately front-loads the primary action ('List every table'), and provides supplementary guidance ('Start here'). Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 zero-parameter, read-only listing tool, the description fully covers purpose, scope, output content, and usage context. No output schema exists, but the description's mention of 'row count' sufficiently indicates the return shape. Sibling tools are distinct and the entry-point guidance completes the context.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to add about parameters. Baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on behavior instead of parameters.

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's action ('List every table'), the exact resource ('store database'), and the result ('with its row count'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like describe_table (which likely describes a specific table's schema) and search_products (which searches data).

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?

'Start here when exploring' gives explicit contextual guidance for when to use this tool as an entry point. It does not explicitly enumerate when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is clear enough to guide selection among siblings.

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