List functions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates a read-only listing action, notes the optional schema filter, and adds that the return data type is included. This goes beyond the schema without overstating side effects.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action and resource. The second sentence adds a meaningful detail about return data type without redundancy or filler.

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, low-complexity tool with one optional parameter and no output schema or annotations. The description adequately conveys the listing behavior, optional filtering, and a notable return column, making it sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 single parameter 'schema' already has a 100% descriptive schema entry ('Optional schema name to filter by, e.g. 'dbo''). The tool description adds the notion of filtering to a 'single schema' but does not materially extend parameter meaning 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 the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'functions in the database', and mentions an optional schema filter. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_tables and list_procedures.

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 clearly states what the tool does and that the schema filter is optional, providing context for when to use it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the sibling tool names and focused wording make the appropriate use case evident.

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