list_knowledge_databases

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool's read-only nature by describing it as listing databases and reporting metrics, which implies no destructive side effects. Additional context about output fields adds transparency, though it could explicitly state it is a safe read operation.

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 two sentences: the first precisely states the action and resource, the second provides key details. No superfluous information, front-loaded, and highly efficient.

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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters, presence of output schema), the description covers all necessary context: it lists what the tool does, what it includes, and what fields are reported, fully enabling correct agent usage.

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?

No parameters exist, giving a baseline of 4. The description adds value by explaining what the output contains (built-in and custom databases, layer, counts, build date), which goes beyond the empty 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?

Description states 'List all knowledge databases (layers)' with specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'create_knowledge_database' and 'build_pdf_knowledge_db' by listing rather than creating. It also details what information is provided (layer, document count, etc.), making purpose very clear.

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 clearly implies usage for listing databases, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. However, the context of sibling tools naturally differentiates it, and the description is sufficient for understanding its role.

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