sqlite_tables

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose one useful trait (WAL is applied when present) and reveals it is a read-style inspection, but it says nothing about permissions, whether it mutates anything, or how the source database is selected, leaving major behavioral questions unanswered.

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 core output list front-loaded and no wasted words. It is terse to the point of omitting needed detail, but it is structurally clean.

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 annotations, no output schema, and four fully undocumented source-selection parameters, the definition is not complete enough for an agent to call it correctly. The description should at minimum explain how the database reference/part/image/local_path are used.

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 description coverage is 0% and all four parameters (ref, part, image, local_path) are undocumented in both the schema and the description. An agent cannot tell how to point the tool at a database or which of the mutually-exclusive source parameters to use.

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 (SQLite database) and enumerates the concrete outputs (tables, row counts, columns, freelist size), giving a clear picture of what the tool returns. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling sqlite_query, which is the nearest alternative.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus sqlite_query, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The parenthetical examples (browser history, chat apps, Android apps) hint at intended targets but do not constitute usage direction.

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