list_tables

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

No annotations provided, but description adequately explains behavior: lists tables, returns names and count. For a read-only listing, this is sufficient. Could mention if any authentication requirements exist, but not critical.

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 sentences, each essential. First states action, second describes output and use case. No wasted words.

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?

With no parameters and an output schema present, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and how it relates to siblings. Complete for a simple tool.

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?

No parameters, so baseline is 4. Description adds value by explaining return format and usage context, which complements the empty input schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool lists tables visible to the warehouse connection, specifies return values (capped names and count), and distinguishes from siblings by recommending use before investigate or watch.

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 says to use this before investigate or watch, providing clear context. However, no mention of when not to use or alternatives for other siblings like check or history.

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