List database agent templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the tool is known to be safe. The description adds the permission requirement (database-agent-templates.read), which is a behavioral gate beyond annotations. It does not contradict annotations and provides additional operational context.

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 two concise sentences: the first states the purpose and content, the second the permission requirement. There is no fluff, and the most important information is front-loaded. Every word 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?

The tool has no output schema, but the description clearly indicates what the list contains. It does not explicitly describe the return format (e.g., paginated list) or structure, but the schema covers parameter details and the title implies a list response. For a simple read-only list tool, this is nearly complete, though it could state the response is a paginated list of template records.

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?

All 5 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the tool description does not need to explain them. The description's mention of engine type, docker images, and resources relates to the response content, not the parameter details. Baseline 3 is correct given full schema coverage.

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 states a clear verb (List) and a specific resource (the templates the database agent provisions instances from), and enumerates the content (engine type, docker images, CPU/memory/disk). This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_database_hosts or list_eggs, which cover different resources.

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?

It provides a clear context: lists templates with specific fields, and includes a permission requirement ('Requires database-agent-templates.read'). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, though its specificity makes the intended use obvious. A 4 is appropriate for clear context without exclusions.

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