dba_featureUsage

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

No annotations are present, so the description shoulders the burden. It reveals the persist parameter creates a volatile table, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not discuss potential side effects, permissions, or safety beyond the basic 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 short, with the main action in the first sentence, followed by a clear argument list. It is front-loaded and efficient, though the argument list could be considered redundant with the schema.

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?

The description explains the basic purpose and the persist behavior, but lacks details on the return format and the exact metrics returned. For a tool with no output schema, more context on the output structure would improve completeness.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description's parameter explanations mirror the schema closely, adding no new meaning beyond what is already defined. The phrase 'user feature usage metrics' provides context, but not beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves user feature usage metrics for a date range, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like dba_databaseSpace and dba_sessionInfo, which focus on different metrics.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The context is implied from the tool name and description, but no exclusions or comparisons to other dba_* tools are provided.

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