list_external_tables

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the returned attribute set, which is useful behavioral context, but is silent on row limits, ordering, pagination, and privilege requirements for reading external table definitions. 'List' implies read-only, but nothing confirms scope or safety.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the verb and resource lead and the attribute list follows economically. It is appropriately sized for a simple listing tool, though the attribute enumeration crowds out space that could have held scope or usage guidance.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description names the columns that come back, which partly covers return semantics. For a one-optional-parameter list tool with no annotations, it is adequate but leaves open whether regular tables are excluded, how results are ordered or capped, and what privileges are needed.

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?

Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents the optional schema/owner filter and the omit-to-search-all behavior. The description adds nothing beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (external tables), and enumerates the attributes returned (access driver, default directory, reject limit, access parameters), which distinguishes it from the plain list_tables sibling by implication. It never explicitly contrasts with list_tables, so differentiation relies on the reader knowing what an external table is.

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 on when to choose this over list_tables or list_directories, and no statement of exclusions or prerequisites. The only usage hint is the schema parameter's own text in the schema itself.

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