List Views

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. The description adds that views are listed, returns a sorted JSON array, and explains pagination with nextCursor. This provides behavioral context beyond 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?

Structure is efficient: one-line summary followed by labeled sections (<usecase>, <examples>, <what_it_returns>, <pagination>). Every sentence serves a purpose with no fluff.

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?

With no parameters and an output schema present, the description covers return format (sorted JSON array of view name strings) and pagination mechanism. This is fully complete for agent use.

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?

Input schema has no parameters (0 params, 100% coverage). Per guidelines, baseline is 4 for zero params. Description adds no parameter info because none needed.

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?

Description clearly states 'List all views in the connected SQLite database.' It specifies the verb (list) and resource (views), and distinguishes from sibling tools like listTables and listTriggers.

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 <usecase> section explicitly states when to use (exploring, verifying, user asking), and <examples> provide correct and incorrect usage, including a counter-example directing to getTableSchema for columns. This offers clear alternatives.

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