jazz_list_tables

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds the scoping detail that tables are from the 'published Jazz schema currently used by the connector,' which is useful context. However, it does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as return format or whether the list might be stale.

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 efficient sentence that front-loads the verb 'List' and specifies the resource clearly. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 read-only list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly sufficient. It clearly states what it lists, though it could explicitly mention that the return is a collection of table names, but this is implied and not a significant gap.

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?

With zero parameters, the schema carries no information, and the description correctly implies no arguments are needed. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description does not need to compensate for any undocumented parameters.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'tables in the published Jazz schema currently used by the connector,' clearly distinguishing it from siblings like jazz_describe_table (which describes a single table) and jazz_query (which queries data).

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 phrase 'currently used by the connector' implies this is the appropriate tool for viewing the active table set, but no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. Usage is inferred rather than directly stated.

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