list_all_schemas

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description reinforces this by stating 'Makes no changes'. It adds value by explaining the behavior of the `showFields` parameter and the `status: marked_for_deletion` attribute for deleted fields, which goes beyond what annotations provide.

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 short, front-loaded with key info (read-only, endpoint, purpose), and every sentence contributes. It uses an emoji for quick recognition and is well-structured without redundancy.

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 read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, behavioral guidance, and parameter hints. It lacks explicit mention of pagination (though limit/offset are in schema) and response structure, but given the tool's simplicity and annotation coverage, it is largely complete.

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?

The input schema covers all 5 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description offers a hint about using `showFields=all` but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states 'List all schemas' and specifies it fetches data from the GET /customObjects/schemas endpoint, making no changes. It distinguishes the tool from its many sibling tools by focusing on Custom Objects schemas, and includes a read-only indicator.

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 description provides a usage tip about leveraging the `showFields=all` parameter for programmatic field creation, but does not explicitly discuss when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., retrieve_a_schema) or when not to use it. The guidelines are present but not comprehensive.

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