Retrieve detailed information about a specific Alibaba Cloud RDS instance by providing the region and instance ID.
Queries the details of an instance.
Args:
region_id: db instance region(e.g. cn-hangzhou)
db_instance_id: db instance id(e.g. rm-xxx)
:return:
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| region_id | Yes | ||
| db_instance_id | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotation readOnlyHint=true already indicates a safe read operation. The description adds 'queries' which aligns, but no additional behavioral traits (e.g., rate limits, auth needs) are disclosed. The annotation carries the burden, so a 3 is appropriate.
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 and to the point, using two sentences plus structured args. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. No unnecessary verbiage, though the formatting could be more standardized.
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 output schema, the description lacks explanation of return values. It also does not differentiate from closely related tools like describe_db_instance_performance. The tool is simple, so a 3 is adequate but leaves gaps.
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 0% with no parameter descriptions in the JSON schema. The description provides example values (e.g., 'cn-hangzhou', 'rm-xxx'), adding meaning beyond the bare schema. This compensates for the missing schema descriptions.
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 'Queries the details of an instance,' which conveys a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like describe_db_instances (likely lists) and describe_db_instance_performance (performance 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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention that it is a detailed query for a single instance, nor does it exclude scenarios where other tools like describe_db_instances or describe_db_instance_performance might be more appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/aliyun/alibabacloud-rds-openapi-mcp-server'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server