list_databases

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

No annotations are provided, and the description simply restates the function without disclosing behavioral traits such as whether the operation is read-only, what 'accessible' means, or any authentication/rate limits.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every part earns its place.

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 simplicity (no output schema, no annotations), the description is too minimal. It does not explain what 'accessible' entails, whether pagination exists, or what the return format looks like. For a listing tool, more context would be helpful.

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% for the single optional parameter 'profile'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's description, so a baseline score of 3 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?

The description 'List all accessible databases' uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('databases'), clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like list_tables and query. No ambiguity.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Usage is implied from the name and siblings, but no when-not or context is provided.

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