superset_list_charts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action and an optional search, but does not mention pagination, permissions, or whether this is read-only. This is minimal and insufficient for full transparency.

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 two short sentences: 'List charts. Optionally search by name.' Both sentences are purposeful and front-loaded, with no 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?

For a simple tool with one optional parameter and an existing output schema, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It lacks context about pagination, result limits, access scope, or any special behavior. This is a clear gap given the absence of annotations.

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 schema has no description for the 'search' parameter, and coverage is 0%. The description adds meaning by saying 'Optionally search by name', which explains what the parameter does. This compensates for the schema gap, though it does not detail matching behavior (e.g., substring vs exact).

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 'List charts' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'list_databases' and 'get_chart'. The plural 'charts' confirms it is a listing operation, differentiating it from singular retrieval.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when to prefer this over 'get_chart' or other list tools, and no exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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