list_procedures

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool lists all or filtered procedures based on the schema parameter, but omits behavioral traits such as side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or pagination behavior. The name implies a read operation, but this is not explicit.

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, using two short paragraphs. The first paragraph states purpose and supported environments, and the second lists parameters. It is nearly fluff-free, though the parameter list could be integrated more tightly.

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 tool has 3 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema (not shown), the description is mostly complete. It explains what the tool does, where it works, and what each parameter is. It lacks details on return format or pagination, but with an output schema, this is acceptable.

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 description adds clear meaning to all three parameters beyond the input schema's types. It explains that workspace and item are names or GUIDs, and that schema optionally filters results. With 0% schema description coverage, this compensation is strong.

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 that the tool lists stored procedures on a warehouse or SQL Analytics Endpoint. The verb 'list' and resource 'stored procedures' are specific, and the tool is easily distinguished from siblings like get_procedure, drop_procedure, and create_procedure.

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 mentions that stored procedures are supported on both Fabric Data Warehouses and SQL Analytics Endpoints, providing context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_procedure or list_functions, nor does it provide any 'when-not' guidance.

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