get_db_statuses

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. 'Get the status' clearly indicates a read-style operation, but it does not disclose details such as side effects, authentication requirements, or what happens when the database is corrupted. This is adequate for a simple status tool but leaves some behavioral specifics implicit.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the purpose and immediately provides a practical usage trigger. Every word contributes meaning, with no filler.

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?

Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it states what is retrieved and when to use it. It does not describe the exact response shape, but for a simple status-checking tool this is a minor gap.

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, so there is nothing for the description to add beyond the schema. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description correctly implies a parameterless call.

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 and resource: 'Get the status of the Tdarr databases.' This clearly identifies what the tool does and distinguishes it from generic siblings like get_status. The endpoint path further reinforces the exact 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?

It gives an explicit invocation condition: 'Use when the UI reports the database as loading, busy or corrupted.' This provides clear context for when the tool is appropriate, though it does not mention alternative tools or exclusions.

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