Show all loaded Pakistan Stock Exchange tables with row counts and UTC load times, helping you verify available datasets before running SQL queries.
List loaded tables with row counts and load time (UTC). No columns — use query("DESCRIBE ") for those.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden; a 'List' verb plus the disclosure of exactly what is returned (row counts, load time normalized to UTC) makes the read-only, non-mutating nature unambiguous. It stops short of stating pagination or freshness behavior, but for a zero-parameter listing tool the behavioral surface is thin.
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?
Two short sentences, zero filler. The primary behavior is front-loaded and the fallback pointer follows immediately.
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?
An output schema exists and covers the return values, so the description need not restate them; the description is nonetheless complete about scope, timezone, and the boundary with query. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.
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 tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing to disambiguate and no description burden. The description's mention of the timezone for load time is useful framing rather than a parameter claim.
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+resource ('List loaded tables') and specifies the returned fields (row counts, load time in UTC). It also carves out scope against the sibling query tool by noting it does not return columns.
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 states the exclusion ('No columns') and routes the agent to the alternative ('use query("DESCRIBE <table>")'), which is clear context for choosing between the two. It doesn't cover when to prefer it over the load_* siblings, but those are ingestion rather than inspection tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.