catia_list_design_tables

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false). The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying exactly what is reported: the design tables, their row counts, and the row currently applied. This goes beyond the annotations and clarifies the tool's return semantics.

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?

A single, focused sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then adds the two key pieces of output detail. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or filler.

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?

For a no-parameter, read-only listing tool, the description is complete: it states what is listed and what information is returned (row counts, applied row). No output schema exists, but the description adequately covers return semantics for an agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly.

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 accepts no parametersaca, so parameter semantics are inherently simple. With zero parametersander 100% schema coverage, the description's focus on what is listed is appropriate and sufficient.

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 names a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('design tables attached to the document'), and the relevant scope of output (row counts and currently applied row). This clearly distinguishes it from design-table mutation siblings like catia_add_design_table and catia_set_design_table_configuration.

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 intended use is implied: call this when you need to inspect design tables rather than create or configure them. There is no explicit mention of alternatives or exclusions, but the read-only listing purpose is fairly self-evident from the description.

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