superset_database_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose one meaningful behavioral trait beyond the schema: the tool walks every page of results rather than returning a single page, and the Returns block explains count/returned/truncated. However, it says nothing about authentication requirements, the safety profile of the call, or how truncation interacts with max_results.

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?

Front-loaded one-line summary followed by compact Args and Returns blocks; every line earns its place and nothing is padded. The Args/Returns scaffolding is conventional rather than elegant but costs little.

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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the definition supplies both parameter meanings and a description of the return fields (count, returned, truncated, rows), which is what an agent needs to call and interpret it. The missing piece is any authorization or permissions context.

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, and it largely does: 'search' is documented as a case-insensitive substring match on database name, and 'max_results' is documented as a stop-after-N-rows cap with its default of 500 restated. Only minor detail (e.g. interaction with the truncation flag) is left implicit.

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 verb and resource: 'List database connections'. The scope phrase 'across every page of results' further pins down that it is an exhaustive listing rather than a single-object fetch, which implicitly separates it from superset_database_get_by_id. It stops short of naming that sibling explicitly, so it is clear but not sibling-differentiated.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no pointer to alternatives such as superset_database_get_by_id or superset_database_get_tables. The listing behavior is only implied by the verb 'List'.

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