list_schemas

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

No annotations are provided. The description only states the basic function and does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, any permissions required, side effects, or error conditions. For a simple listing tool, more transparency would be beneficial.

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 sentences with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and gets straight to the point.

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?

Given zero parameters and an existing output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's purpose and database-specific behavior. However, it could mention behavior for other database types (e.g., SQLite) and whether the output is a list of names.

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?

There are no parameters, and the input schema is empty with 100% coverage. The description adds meaning by explaining the database-specific behavior, which is relevant context. Baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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?

Description clearly states the tool lists all schemas in the connected database, with specific behavior for PostgreSQL and MySQL. It uses a specific verb-resource pair and distinguishes from sibling tools like list_tables and list_databases.

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 some context about database-specific behavior (PostgreSQL vs MySQL) but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_databases or list_tables. No usage exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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