List views

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates the read-only nature via 'List' and discloses the return fields (table_schema, table_name). It does not mention potential side effects or edge cases, but for a simple listing tool, this level of transparency is adequate.

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 concise and well-structured, consisting of two short sentences that state the purpose, the optional filter, and the returned columns. There is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 tool with a single optional parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. It specifies the resource (views), the optional filtering behavior, and the returned fields (table_schema and table_name). No additional context seems necessary for correct invocation.

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%, with the schema parameter already described as 'Optional schema name to filter by'. The description reinforces this by mentioning 'optionally filtered to a single schema', but it adds little beyond what the schema already provides. The baseline 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 'List views in the database' with a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_tables and list_procedures by specifying 'views'. It also mentions optional schema filtering, making the scope precise.

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 when to use the tool (when you need to list views, optionally in a schema) but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives or state exclusions. Sibling context suggests alternatives, but the description itself lacks direct when-to-use vs when-not-to-use guidance.

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