list_stored_procedures

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the core behavior (listing procedures with optional schema filter) but does not mention return format, inclusion of system procedures, or any permissions needed. For a simple read-only list tool, this is minimal but 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?

One concise sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no wasted words.

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 tool is simple and parameters are fully described in the schema. However, there is no output schema and the description does not specify what the response contains (e.g., names only vs. fully qualified objects). Given the sibling tools include a definition retriever, the description could have clarified the scope of 'listing' to aid selection.

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 documents both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds only that the schema filter is optional, which is already implied by the parameter not being required. It does not explain the database parameter beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' with a clear resource 'stored procedures' and scoping 'in a database, optionally filtered by schema'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_tables, list_views, and get_stored_procedure_definition by resource and action.

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 implies usage when you need to enumerate stored procedures, but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives such as get_stored_procedure_definition for retrieving definitions. There is no explicit exclusion or comparison.

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