list_bases

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds useful context about API token visibility and platform-specific parameter behavior, but it does not describe the return format, pagination, or potential errors. This is a modest disclosure for a simple list tool.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and every word contributes value. No redundant or vague phrasing.

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 tool with a single optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and usage context. However, it leaves minor ambiguity about whether workspace_id is required on Cloud when multiple workspaces exist, and it does not hint at the return structure. These are minor gaps for such a simple tool.

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?

Although the schema already documents the workspace_id parameter well (100% coverage), the description adds practical meaning by explaining when to pass it and when to omit it (Cloud vs. self-hosted). This goes beyond the schema's static description.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'List NocoDB bases (projects) visible to this API token.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the mention of 'bases (projects)' distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_workspaces and list_tables.

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 description provides clear context for when to pass the workspace_id parameter: 'on NocoDB Cloud if you have multiple workspaces' and to omit it for self-hosted instances. It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools, but for a list operation the usage context is sufficiently clear.

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