list_database_principals

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the source (sys.database_principals) and the filter, but lacks details on read-only nature, required permissions, pagination, or error conditions. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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 concise: one sentence for purpose and a simple args block. Every part is informative, and the main intent is front-loaded. No unnecessary 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 an output schema present, the description need not cover return values. It covers all three parameters adequately. However, it could provide more context about what database principals are or the behavior when the warehouse endpoint is invalid. Still, it is largely complete for a simple listing 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden of explaining parameters. It clearly defines workspace and item as identifiers and explains principal_type filter values ('user', 'role', 'all'), adding meaning beyond the bare 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?

The description clearly states 'List database principals from sys.database_principals', specifying the verb (list) and the resource (database principals). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_item_permissions which list permissions, not principals.

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 provides a filter parameter but does not give explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use it or which sibling tools are more appropriate for related tasks like permissions.

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