list_sequences

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well by revealing the output fields. It implicitly indicates a read-only metadata operation, avoiding any ambiguity about side effects. It does not discuss permissions, but for a simple listing tool this is acceptable.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that states the action, optional filter, and output fields without any wasted words or redundancy.

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?

This is a simple list tool with no output schema, and the description compensates by naming the specific attributes returned. It provides enough context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly and understand what it will receive.

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 input schema already fully describes both parameters (schema and database) with 100% coverage. The description adds 'optionally filtered by schema' but does not provide additional detail beyond the schema descriptions, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 all sequences in a database, with an optional schema filter. It enumerates the returned properties (data type, range, increment, cycling, current value), making the purpose specific and distinct from sibling tools like list_tables or list_views.

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 clear usage context (list sequences, filter by schema, target a database), but does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives or provide exclusions. The use case is self-evident given the unique resource.

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