redis_keyspace

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

readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, so the description's job is to add context. It does add the data source (INFO keyspace) and the default-target behavior, but says nothing about cost, freshness, or what happens when the target is unreachable.

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?

One front-loaded sentence plus a short args block; every line earns its place. The 'Args:' formatting is slightly mechanical but not wasteful.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description names the return content (key counts and expiry coverage) and the parameter's semantics, which is enough to invoke correctly. Minor gaps around target naming and error behavior.

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 0% and the single parameter has no schema description, so the description carries the burden: it explains that target names a redis target from config and that omitting it selects the default. That is exactly the missing semantics, though it doesn't say what a valid target name looks like.

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 resource and scope: per-db key counts and expiry coverage sourced from the INFO keyspace section. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling redis_memory_stats or redis_config_get, though it does not explicitly note the overlap with the broader redis_server_info.

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 [READ] tag hints at read-only usage and the target arg note says when to omit it, but there is no guidance on when to reach for this tool instead of redis_server_info or redis_memory_stats, and no prerequisites stated.

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