list_sequences

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

No annotations, so the description carries the burden, and it delivers real behavioral context: data comes from ALL_SEQUENCES rather than DBA_SEQUENCES (implying visibility is limited to what the session can see), and cache_size > 0 implies pre-allocated values that can leave gaps after a crash or rollback. It stops short of stating privilege requirements, result ordering, or any row-limit/pagination behavior.

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?

Front-loads the returned fields, then adds the operational caveat about cache size, then the disambiguation to the sibling. Three dense sentences with no 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 read-only list tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers returned columns, data-source scoping, and sibling routing. Minor omissions remain around privileges/visibility limits of ALL_SEQUENCES and result ordering, but nothing blocks a correct call.

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% with the schema already stating 'Omit to search all schemas.' The description's 'Optional schema filter' merely restates this, so the baseline 3 applies.

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') plus resource ('sequences') and enumerates the exact columns returned (range, increment, last number, cycle flag, cache size), and names the sibling it is not (get_sequence_info). An agent can distinguish it from get_sequence_info and create_sequence without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: use get_sequence_info for a single sequence's full metadata including order_flag, and this tool for a list. It also flags that the schema filter is optional, so the agent knows a no-arg call is valid.

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