listRoutines

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by specifying the resource types (functions, procedures, packages) and optional pattern filtering, which goes beyond annotations. It doesn't describe pagination or ordering, but output schema exists.

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 sentences, zero waste. Purpose is front-loaded, and the alternative is given immediately after. Very 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 listing tool with an output schema and read-only annotations, the description covers key decision points: what is listed, optional pattern, and when to use the alternative. It doesn't mention pagination or limits, but those are likely in the output schema. It's sufficiently complete for an agent to call correctly.

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 67%, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions 'in a schema' and 'by name pattern' which adds meaning to the schema and namePattern parameters. The connection parameter is documented in-schema with a directive to call listConnections. The schema parameter lacks in-schema documentation but is implied in the description, though not explicitly detailed.

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 'Discover function, procedure and package names in a schema' – a clear verb, resource, and scope. It also explicitly distinguishes from getRoutineDefinition, making it easy to select the right tool.

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?

Explicitly states when to use the alternative getRoutineDefinition ('when the source of one known routine is needed') and mentions the optional name pattern, which implies when to use it. Doesn't exhaustively cover all sibling listings but gives the primary decision.

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