sas_tables

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes this is a safe read, so the description only needs to add context. It contributes the scoping constraint ('one SAS library') and the caveat that column/row metadata exists only 'where SAS knows them', but says nothing about permissions, result size, or pagination.

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?

A single efficient sentence with the resource stated up front. The trailing qualifier 'where SAS knows them' is slightly vague but the description is appropriately sized for a one-parameter listing tool.

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 read tool with no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient: it conveys what is returned (tables with row/column metadata). It omits how many results come back, whether results are paginated, and how to choose among the many sibling listing tools.

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 0% and the sole required parameter 'library' is undocumented. The phrase 'in one SAS library' only weakly implies the parameter scopes the query to a single library; it says nothing about expected format (libref vs. name) or whether it accepts patterns/lists.

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 names the resource precisely and even disambiguates SAS terminology ('data sets and views'), but never supplies a verb ('list'/'enumerate') and offers no differentiation from siblings like sas_libraries, sas_columns, cas_tables, or list_tables.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of any alternative tool. An agent gets no help deciding between this, cas_tables, schema_explorer_tables, or list_tables.

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