getDatabaseProvisionExample

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Gets' which implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly declare side-effect-free behavior or disclose any other behavioral traits. For a trivial example-retrieval tool this is minimally acceptable, though it adds little beyond what the name suggests.

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, front-loaded sentence with 11 words. It contains no filler, repetition, or unnecessary details, making it perfectly concise and easily scannable.

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 params, output schema present, no annotations), the one-sentence description is sufficient. It clearly states what the tool returns and is complete for the agent to select and invoke it correctly without additional 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 zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100% by default. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and since no parameters exist, the description need not add any parameter details. It correctly avoids irrelevant information.

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 'Gets an example of a GitHub Action for provisioning a database' uses a specific verb ('Gets') and resource ('example of a GitHub Action for provisioning a database'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like getAppProvisionExample or getDatabaseRestoreExample. The 'provisioning' modifier differentiates it from other database example tools.

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 implies when to use the tool (when you need a provisioning example) but does not explicitly state alternatives or 'when not to use'. There is no mention of sibling tools or exclusions, so usage context is only implied by the tool's name and description.

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