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

Adds real context beyond the annotations: a hard quota of 30, engine incompatibility with Valkey, admin ownership, and the required databases.write scope. It doesn't cover what happens when the quota is reached, but the description clearly earns credit with annotations present.

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 verb and resource, then layers constraint, exclusion, and scope compactly. The parentheticals are dense but each carries distinct information; only the Valkey SELECT-range detail borders on excess.

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 two-parameter creation tool with full schema coverage and a safety profile in annotations, the description covers quota, engine support, ownership, and required permission. Only the return value (whether an id/credentials come back) is left unaddressed.

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 coverage is 100%, with both 'name' (regex + pattern explanation) and 'database' (id source) fully documented in the schema. The description adds no further parameter detail, 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 and resource ('Creates another database inside the managed database') and clarifies the ownership model. The nesting phrase distinguishes it from the top-level create_database sibling without naming it explicitly.

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?

Gives a concrete precondition ('up to 30') and an explicit exclusion ('Not on Valkey'), telling the agent when not to call it. It does not name an alternative sibling for the Valkey case, which keeps it short of a 5.

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