List Stored Procedures

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It clearly communicates a read-only enumeration operation and describes the returned content: all stored procedures plus their input and output parameter information. It does not mention caveats like permissions or ordering, but for a simple list tool the core behavior is transparent.

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 that immediately names the operation and resource, then adds useful output detail without redundancy. Every word contributes to agent understanding.

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 the tool's low complexity, zero parameters, and absence of annotations or output schema, the description covers the essential information: what is listed, the scope, and the parameter detail included. It could expand on result shape or potential limitations, but these are not critical for successful invocation.

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 tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so no parameter-level explanation is required. The description already states what information is returned, which is sufficient; baseline for zero-parameter tools 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Lists') and resource ('stored procedures'), clearly states the scope ('all stored procedures in the database'), and adds return-relevant detail ('with input and output parameter information'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list-tables, list-functions, and list-triggers by naming the exact resource type.

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 given for when to use this tool versus alternatives such as describe-procedure or list-functions. The only usage signal is the inherent meaning of 'List' — there are no exclusions, prerequisites, or explicit comparative direction.

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