list_synonyms

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It states the core action and optional schema filter, but does not disclose return format, default database behavior, or any permissions. It is not misleading but lacks depth beyond the obvious.

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 with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and key optional behavior.

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, with two optional parameters and no output schema. The description adequately explains the tool's primary function, but could be more complete by specifying the exact return fields (e.g., synonym names, schemas). However, 'list all synonyms' implies the return of a synonym list, which is sufficient for most cases.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions 'optionally filtered by schema', which aligns with the schema parameter but doesn't add significant meaning beyond what the input schema already documents.

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 verb ('List'), resource ('synonyms'), and scope ('in a database, optionally filtered by schema'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_tables and get_synonym_definition, which serve different purposes.

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 context on when to use the tool (to list synonyms) and mentions an optional filter (by schema). While it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools, the context is sufficient and no exclusions are stated.

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