list_tables

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, whether it returns all tables or paginated results, or anything about permissions or scope limits beyond 'under a database'.

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 efficient sentence with no waste, front-loading the verb and resource. It is appropriately sized for a simple list tool but lacks any additional structure that would aid selection.

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 one-parameter read-only list tool with full schema coverage, the description is minimally complete. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it could disclose return behavior or scope assumptions; it remains adequate but not thorough.

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 100%, and the single parameter database_id is documented in the schema as 'Database ID'. The description adds only the relational scope ('under a database') but no format or syntax details 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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (log tables) scoped to a database, so purpose is clear. However, it does not differentiate itself from siblings like list_databases, list_instances, or search_logs, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_logs or list_databases, nor any prerequisites. The one-sentence description offers implied usage only as a list operation.

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