list_views

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

注解已声明readOnlyHint=true，描述未添加额外行为信息，如返回格式或限制，但未与注解冲突，注解已覆盖主要安全特性，因此评分3。

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?

描述仅一句话，简洁清晰，没有冗余内容，信息密度高。

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?

对于简单只读列出工具，描述足够，但未提及返回内容或限制，不过缺少输出schema，且工具复杂度低，可接受。

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?

尽管schema描述覆盖率为0%，描述提到'可选按schema过滤'为schema参数提供了基本语义，但未说明格式或允许的值，对于简单字符串参数来说信息有限。

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?

描述'列出视图'明确指出了动作和对象，与兄弟工具list_tables、list_schemas形成区分，清晰指出列出视图，并说明可选按schema过滤。

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?

描述未提供任何关于何时使用此工具或何时使用替代工具的指导，也未说明与其他列表类工具的区别，仅简单描述了功能。

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