list_projectsList your SeedBase projects (id, name, database type). Use this first to find the project to work with.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| projects | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. Description adds that it returns specific fields and is a preliminary step. No contradictions; consistent with annotations.
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded with action and resource. No wasted words.
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 zero-parameter list tool with output schema, description mentions output fields and usage context. Sufficient and complete.
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 has 0 parameters with 100% coverage. No parameters to describe; baseline 4 is appropriate.
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?
Clearly states 'List your SeedBase projects' with specific output fields (id, name, database type). Distinguishes itself by positioning as the first step: 'Use this first to find the project to work with.'
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 says 'Use this first' providing clear usage context. No explicit when-not cases, but the guidance is strong enough to imply this is the entry point before other tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: creating projects, importing schemas, generating data, fetching generation results, getting DDL, and listing projects. No overlap or confusion possible.
Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case, though some verbs are compound (e.g., 'generate_test_data' vs 'create_project'). Minor deviation but overall predictable.
With 6 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose of managing test data generation. Each tool is necessary and none feel extraneous.
The set covers the essential workflow: create project, import schema, generate data, fetch results, view DDL. Missing delete or update project, but those are not core to generation.