SCB: finn fram til en tabell

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the browse behavior ('ett nivå om gangen'), the path-based ID model, the no-argument top-level case, and the source/license. It does not describe the exact response structure or edge cases, but the core behavior is clearly visible.

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 short, front-loaded, and free of filler. Every sentence contributes: what it does, why it must be used first, how to invoke it without parameters, and where the data comes from.

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 simple one-optional-parameter tool, the description is mostly sufficient, but there is no output schema and the description never explains what the returned 'folders and tables' entries look like or how callers should feed the returned path into sibling tools. It implies the loop but does not fully complete it.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema already describes 'sti' with an example and the omit-for-top-level rule. The description reinforces the point and adds a fuller path example, but it does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 action and resource: it navigates SCB's subject tree one level at a time and shows folders and tables. It also distinguishes itself from sibling SCB tools by stating 'START HER', making clear it is the discovery entry point.

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 explicitly says to call it first, that no other tool can be used without the path, and that omitting the argument gives the top level. It does not explicitly say 'use scb_tabell_info/verdier/data instead when you already have the path', so it stops short of naming alternatives, though the implication is clear.

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