listar_tabelas

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It adds a useful behavioral trait by stating the listing is 'deterministicamente' and scoped to 'tabelas lógicas', but it does not explicitly state side effects, permissions, or whether the operation is read-only, though 'Lista' implies non-mutating.

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 a single sentence with no filler. The core action, resource, and determinism guarantee are all front-loaded, making it efficient and easy to process.

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?

The output schema covers return values and the zero-parameter schema keeps invocation simple, so those are not gaps. However, the lack of annotations and the presence of several sibling tools mean the description does not fully establish when to choose this tool or what 'tabelas lógicas' means relative to other catalog views.

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 has zero properties and 100% schema description coverage, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. This matches the baseline for no-parameter tools.

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 uses a specific verb, 'Lista', and a clear resource, 'tabelas lógicas do catálogo local', so an agent knows what the tool does. It does not explicitly differentiate this tool from the sibling 'buscar_tabelas', so it falls short of full sibling distinction.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the alternatives like buscar_tabelas, status_catalogo, or inferir_relacionamentos. The intended usage must be inferred solely from the tool name and the one-line description.

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