List stored procedures in a schema

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that results come from SYS.PROCEDURES and include parameter counts, which is useful, but it does not disclose additional behavior such as pagination defaults, schema name fallback, or ordering.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose and result content. There is no redundant or extraneous information.

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?

Given the simple read-only nature, the annotations, and a schema with four optional parameters, the description is largely sufficient. It specifies the source (SYS.PROCEDURES) and the returned information (parameter counts), but could marginally mention defaults or return shape, especially since no output schema is provided.

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 schema description coverage is 50%, with limit and offset lacking descriptions. The tool description does not provide any additional meaning for these parameters, nor does it explain the default for schema_name. Thus, it fails to compensate for the schema's incomplete parameter documentation.

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 clearly states the tool lists stored procedures and their parameter counts from SYS.PROCEDURES. The verb 'List' and resource 'stored procedures' are specific, and this distinguishes it from sibling tools like hana_list_tables or hana_list_functions.

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 usage is implied by the title and description: it is a listing tool for stored procedures. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like hana_describe_procedure or hana_list_functions, nor does it mention any exclusion criteria.

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