get_database_info

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the full burden. It only says 'Get information', implying a read operation, but omits behavioral traits like idempotency, authentication requirements, rate limits, or response details. With an output schema present, the structure may be documented there, but description adds no behavioral context beyond the verb.

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, concise sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently communicates the tool's purpose.

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 no parameters, presence of output schema, and a clear purpose, the description is largely complete. It could mention that it requires no inputs, but that is minor. Overall, it adequately covers the essentials for a simple tool.

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 no need for parameter information. The description does not add parameter semantics, but the baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and there is no missing explanation.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'information about the database server and available databases'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'show_tables' (lists tables) and 'describe_table' (describes a specific table) by focusing on server-level info.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions. It simply states what it does, leaving the agent to infer usage context. A score of 3 is appropriate for minimal but not entirely absent guidance.

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