List Columns

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. 'List' clearly indicates a read-only operation, and it explains the conditional inclusion of column and parent-table comments. However, it does not mention pagination behavior or any side effects, so the disclosure is adequate but not rich.

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 with no filler; the main list behavior is front-loaded and the optional comment behaviors are stated compactly. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description covers the core invocation and the non-obvious comment options, and an output schema exists to define return values. It doesn't position the tool against its siblings or mention how limit/offset apply, which leaves some context gaps for an agent deciding among list_tables/search_columns.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for the schema, and it does add useful semantics for include_comments and include_parent_comments. It leaves limit, offset, schema_name, and table_name to convention, which is mostly acceptable for obvious names but still leaves the low-coverage burden only partially discharged.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('List columns in a table') and names the returned fields, making the core purpose unmistakable. It doesn't explicitly contrast with search_columns or get_all_column_comments, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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 choose this tool over search_columns, get_all_column_comments, or list_tables. The description only says what it does and how to turn on comments, which implies the read/list use case but never states exclusions or alternatives.

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