List Tables

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds useful context with 'Pulls a fresh copy from the device,' indicating the operation retrieves current data rather than relying on a cached copy. However, it does not mention whether the operation is strictly read-only, what the return value looks like, or any connectivity/device requirements.

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?

Two short sentences convey purpose and behavioral context with no filler. The core function is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds a meaningful detail without bloating the description.

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 one-parameter list operation, the description is adequate: it names the action, the target resource, and the freshness behavior. The schema covers the required input. It could be slightly more complete by specifying the output format, but 'List all tables' makes the likely return type (a list of table names) sufficiently clear.

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 input schema already fully documents the single 'database' parameter with a clear example ('app.db'), so baseline applies. The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning, but none is needed given the high schema coverage.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'List all tables in a SQLite database.' This clearly differentiates it from siblings like list_databases and describe_table, which target databases and table schemas respectively. The tool's purpose is immediately obvious.

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?

Usage is implied by the purpose: use this when you need the list of tables in a given SQLite database. However, the description does not explicitly contrast it with sibling tools such as describe_table or query, nor does it state when not to use it. No exclusionary guidance is provided.

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