list_views

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

The description implies a read-only listing operation but doesn't disclose authentication needs, pagination, or whether all views are accessible regardless of permissions. It notes optional database/server defaults, which adds some transparency but is minimal for a tool with no annotations.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the core purpose, no wasted words. Highly efficient.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is functional but lacks details on result format, permission implications, or ordering. It meets minimum viability but has clear gaps.

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 the description adds no new meaning beyond what the input schema already provides (e.g., 'Database name (uses connection default if omitted)'). Baseline of 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?

The description 'List all views in a database, optionally filtered by schema' uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('views'), clearly stating scope and optional filtering, which distinguishes it from siblings like list_tables or list_procedures.

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?

No instructions on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites or when not to use it. For example, it doesn't contrast with describe_table for view details or mention that database/server default to connection settings.

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