faucet_list_tables

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds meaningful value by disclosing the permission requirement ('Requires GET permission on _table') and the approximate nature of row counts. That is well beyond structured data. It stops short of 5 because it doesn't describe pagination behavior, scope limits, or what happens with large schemas.

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?

Three tight sentences: what it returns, when to use it, and the permission requirement. Nothing is wasted and the payload (what you get back) 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 read-only, single-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage context, return contents, and auth needs. The only gap is the absence of pagination or volume guidance, which is minor but real for a 'list all tables' operation.

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% and the single 'service' parameter is fully described in the schema as the database service to list tables for. The description adds no syntax, format, or lookup guidance beyond that, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('List all tables in a database service') and distinguishes itself from siblings like faucet_describe_table and faucet_query by promising row counts and column summaries. An agent can immediately tell what data comes back.

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 clear context: 'Use this to explore what data is available before querying specific tables.' That is a real when-to-use signal pointing at faucet_query as the downstream step. It does not name explicit alternatives or exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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