arango_get_database_resolution

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It correctly indicates this is a read-only diagnostic operation showing algorithm results, but does not disclose session context implications or confirm lack of side effects. Basic transparency is achieved.

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 well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and key detail (6-level priority), with no extraneous information.

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, no output schema, and a simple diagnostic purpose, the description is fully complete. It explains what the tool does and the key aspect of its output (which database based on priority fallback).

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 the schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter details, but with no parameters, a baseline of 4 is appropriate as nothing more is needed.

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 shows the database resolution algorithm result for the current session, with specific mention of the 6-level priority fallback. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like arango_database_status or arango_get_focused_database by focusing on resolution logic rather than status or selection.

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 implies the tool is for diagnostic use to understand which database would be chosen, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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