List Tables in Topic

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds useful context about typical table volume and data views, but it does not disclose further behavioral traits such as response size limits, pagination, or result variability.

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 front-loaded with a one-sentence definition, followed by compact bullets and a short routing note. Every sentence contributes useful information, and there is no redundant restatement of the schema or title.

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 two-parameter read-only tool with full schema coverage, an output schema, and strong sibling guidance, the description is complete. It explains how to discover the required argument, what kind of content to expect, and when to choose an alternative tool.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real value beyond the schema by mapping example subject-area IDs to content ('population tables', 'employment tables', 'housing price tables') and expected table counts, making the required subjectArea parameter more meaningful to an agent.

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 and resource: 'List all statistical tables within a subject area.' It also distinguishes itself from siblings by naming list_subject_areas and search_statistics and clarifying that the scope is subject-area-based, not a general search.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool versus alternatives: 'Use list_subject_areas first to find the area ID, or use search_statistics for direct search.' It also gives concrete subject-area examples with expected table counts, which helps the agent decide whether this is the right entry point.

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