OCI MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden but fails to disclose behavioral traits. It doesn't mention if this is a destructive operation, requires specific permissions, has side effects, rate limits, or what happens on success/failure. 'Start' implies a state change but lacks operational details.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence, front-loaded with the core action. There's no wasted verbiage, making it efficient to parse, though this brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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 no annotations, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and a mutation tool (starting a resource), the description is incomplete. It lacks essential context like behavioral effects, parameter meaning, and expected outcomes, making it inadequate for safe and effective use by an agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate but adds no parameter information. It doesn't explain what 'db_node_id' is, its format, or where to obtain it, leaving the single required parameter undocumented beyond the schema's basic type.

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 'Start a DB Node' clearly states the action (start) and target resource (DB Node), which is better than a tautology. However, it lacks specificity about what 'start' means operationally (e.g., powering on, activating) and doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'start_db_system' or 'start_instance', leaving ambiguity about scope.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Siblings include related tools like 'start_db_system', 'start_instance', 'reboot_db_node', 'stop_db_node', but the description offers no context for selection, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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