list_database_tables

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating this is a safe read operation. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by specifying required permissions ('Permissions:{'all_of': ['Query Data Lake']}') and detailing the exact return structure, which provides important behavioral information about authorization needs and output format.

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 well-structured and appropriately sized, with clear sections for purpose, requirements, and return values. While slightly longer than minimal, every sentence adds value and the information is front-loaded with the core purpose first.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity, the description provides complete context: clear purpose, usage prerequisites, detailed return structure, and required permissions. With annotations covering safety and an output schema presumably documenting the return format, the description fills all necessary gaps for effective tool use.

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 100% schema description coverage, the input schema already fully documents the single 'database' parameter. The description doesn't add any additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, but the schema itself provides complete coverage, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 the specific action ('List all available tables') and target resource ('in a Panther Database'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_databases (which lists databases) and get_table_schema (which gets schema details). It provides a complete picture of what the tool does.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('Only use valid database names obtained from list_databases'), providing clear prerequisites and linking to a specific sibling tool. This gives the agent precise guidance on proper usage context.

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