list_sql_endpoints

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It explains parameter behavior but does not mention the read-only nature of the operation, required permissions, or other side effects. The description is minimally adequate.

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 two sentences long, with the first sentence stating the core purpose and the second detailing parameter behavior. Every word is meaningful; no redundancy or fluff.

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?

The description covers the essential behavior for listing SQL endpoints, including parameter interaction. An output schema exists (though not shown), so the description need not explain return values. Minor gap: no mention of default behavior when neither parameter is set (though schema shows workspace is required).

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description effectively defines both parameters: 'workspace' as a string filter and 'all_workspaces' as a boolean that overrides workspace when true. This adds critical meaning beyond the raw schema fields.

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 tool lists SQL analytics endpoints using specific verb 'List' and resource 'SQL analytics endpoints'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_sql_endpoint (retrieves one) and list_sql_pools (different resource).

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 explains the behavior of the 'all_workspaces' parameter and its interaction with 'workspace', providing clear guidance on when to use each. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives beyond implicit distinction from siblings.

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