List all stored procedures in a Firebird database to discover available routines for schema analysis, migration, or documentation. Use with a database alias or active session.
Lista todas as Stored Procedures cadastradas no banco especificado (ou ativo na sessão). Se houver múltiplos bancos no projeto e nenhum estiver ativo na sessão, pergunte antes ao usuário.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| db_alias | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the session-active fallback and the multi-database disambiguation behavior, but says nothing about read-only nature, permissions, or result shape for a read/list operation.
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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action followed by the one conditional caveat. Nothing is wasted and no filler is present.
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 one-optional-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers the main ambiguity an agent faces (which database). It is essentially complete, missing only minor read-only confirmation.
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 single db_alias parameter is undocumented in the schema. The description compensates partially by clarifying the parameter is optional and defaults to the session-active database, but adds no format or accepted-value detail for the alias itself.
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?
States a specific verb ('Lista') and resource ('Stored Procedures') with a stated scope (specified DB or session-active DB), which is enough to separate it from fb_list_tables, fb_list_views and fb_list_generators. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so differentiation is implicit rather than spelled out.
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?
Gives real usage context: when the DB is ambiguous and none is active, the agent is told to ask the user first. That is actionable routing guidance, though it never names an alternative sibling or a when-not-to-use condition.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.