db_list

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses account-scoped visibility ('visible to the current/impersonated account'), which is a useful behavioral trait beyond a plain 'list databases' phrasing. However, it does not explicitly state read-only intent, mention any prerequisites or side effects, or describe edge cases such as whether system databases are included.

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, tightly worded sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then adds the scope qualifier. Every word earns its place with 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 simple, zero-parameter listing tool with an output schema, the description is almost fully complete. It clearly names the action, the resource, and the auth scope. It could be more complete by noting when to prefer this over sibling db_* tools, but that gap is already captured under usage guidelines.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so there is no parameter meaning for the description to add. Per the zero-parameter baseline, the description adequately covers semantics by simply not introducing any parameter-related ambiguity.

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 specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('databases'), and a clear scope ('visible to the current/impersonated account'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like db_info, db_get, and db_users, which could otherwise be conflated with a generic listing operation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as db_info, db_get, or db_users. With a large family of db_* siblings, an agent would need to infer the intended use solely from the tool name, as no when/when-not conditions or alternative references are provided.

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