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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but fails to mention mutation side effects, idempotency behavior, error conditions (e.g., duplicate titles), or permission requirements beyond the implied 'Create' verb.

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 appropriately brief at three words, but lacks structural value as it contains no actionable guidance or distinguishing information beyond the tool name itself.

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 creation tool with three required parameters—including a complex nested properties object with additionalProperties—no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate as it fails to explain the parent-child relationship or the expected structure of the properties schema.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters (title, parent_id, properties). The description adds no additional semantic context (e.g., that parent_id refers to a page, or that properties defines the database schema), warranting the baseline score.

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 'Create a new database' restates the tool name (create_database) without distinguishing from siblings like list_databases or get_database, fitting the definition of tautology.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_databases, nor does it mention prerequisites like the parent_id requirement or when creation is preferred over querying existing databases.

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