MCP Oracle Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states it lists tables for the current user. It doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as permissions needed, rate limits, pagination, or output format, leaving significant gaps for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 in Spanish that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, with no wasted content.

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 (0 parameters, no output schema), the description is minimal but incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral aspects like permissions or output structure, which are important even for a simple tool with no annotations, making it inadequate for full context.

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 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents the lack of inputs. The description adds no parameter information, but this is acceptable given the baseline for zero parameters is 4, as it doesn't need to compensate for missing details.

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 action ('Lista todas' - lists all) and resource ('tablas disponibles' - available tables), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'describe_table' or 'execute_query', which prevents a score of 5.

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 like 'describe_table' (for table details) or 'execute_query' (for querying data). It lacks context about prerequisites or exclusions, offering only basic functionality.

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