list_views

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It indicates that the tool returns SQL definitions, which is a read-only operation. However, it does not disclose potential failure modes (e.g., invalid schema) or any performance considerations.

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 sentence, concise and front-loaded. Every word is purposeful, 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 simple listing tool with an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It specifies the return content (SQL definitions). Given the tool's simplicity, it covers the essential context, though it could mention the schema parameter's role more explicitly.

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?

Only one parameter 'schema' with a default. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema's title and default value. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description should compensate but fails to do so. It merely repeats the concept of schema without context.

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 action (list), the resource (views and materialized views), and the additional detail (with SQL definitions). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_tables or list_functions.

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 it is used to retrieve views in a schema but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives or mention prerequisites like schema existence. The usage is implied but not elaborated.

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