pg_list_databases

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the active-profile vs one-shot behavior and the optional override, which is helpful. However, it does not describe side effects, error handling, or what happens when no active profile is set; for a list operation this is a moderate gap but not misleading.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that starts with the verb and packs the key scoping detail (active profile vs one-shot) efficiently. There is no filler or redundant text.

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 simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the main usage context: which server and how to select a profile. It does not describe the return format or behavior with no profile set, but these are minor given the low complexity and the absence of an output schema.

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 100%, so the parameter description in the schema already explains profile values and the sticky session behavior. The tool description restates the idea of a 'one-shot' override and 'active profile server', adding slight contextual nuance but not significant new meaning beyond the schema.

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 precise verb ('List') and resource ('databases'), scoped to 'the active profile server', with an optional profile override. This is clearly distinct from sibling tools pg_list_schemas and pg_list_tables, so an agent can differentiate without opening schemas.

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 gives clear context: it operates on the active profile unless a one-shot profile is supplied. While it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, the sibling names and the 'databases' resource make when-to-use unambiguous. The profile override guidance is useful for choosing behavior.

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