get_db_table_list

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

Annotations already declare this as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond those hints: it performs SHOW TABLES IN, uses the server default database when db_name is omitted, and applies SQL LIKE filtering via pattern. This gives the agent accurate expectations without contradicting any annotation.

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 compact clauses with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, followed immediately by the two parameter behaviors that matter for invoking the tool correctly.

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 parameterless-required listing tool, the description covers the essentials: what is listed, which database is used by default, and how filtering works. An output schema is present, so return-value details do not need to be stated in the description.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameter meaning. It does so explicitly for both parameters: db_name selects the database and defaults to the server default database when omitted, while pattern filters using SQL LIKE semantics. This fully compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'List tables and views of a database', and reinforces it with the actual SQL command 'SHOW TABLES IN db'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_db_list (databases) and get_table_schema (individual table details).

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: to list tables and views in a database. It also provides practical usage guidance for optional parameters (omit db_name to use the default database; pattern uses SQL LIKE). It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, but the context is unambiguous.

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