schema_tables

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

No annotations provided. The description only states what is returned, not behavioral traits such as read-only nature, performance implications, or lack of side effects. For a listing tool, these are expected but undocumented.

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, clear sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose and the information provided, with no extraneous 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?

Given the simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is adequate. It could mention that an empty database returns an empty list or how results are ordered, but it covers the essential output.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with the 'database' parameter description in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 action ('List all tables') and specifies the returned information (engine, row count, size estimates, comments). It distinguishes from siblings like schema_table_detail (single table) and schema_foreign_keys (specific relationships).

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 implies usage for getting an overview of database tables but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like schema_table_detail for details on a single table or schema_search for searching.

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