local_ydb_bootstrap

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds critical behavioral context about the dry-run mode (plan-only without confirm=true), which goes beyond annotations and aids safe invocation.

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 sentence but packs essential information (purpose, components, usage constraints) efficiently. It is front-loaded and avoids filler, though the density could be slightly difficult to parse.

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 adequately explains the tool's behavior (plan vs. execution) and its role among many siblings. It covers key input semantics and usage context, though return value format is not detailed.

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 adds operational nuance by clarifying that confirm must be true for execution and that profile defaults to config.defaultProfile, enhancing understanding beyond schema definitions.

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 specifies a precise action ('Bootstrap a tenant topology') and lists specific components (static node with GraphShard flags, CMS tenant, primary dynamic node), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like local_ydb_create_tenant or local_ydb_bootstrap_root_database.

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?

Explicitly states the scenarios where the tool should be used ('only for tenant, GraphShard, dump/restore, or dynamic-node scenarios') and notes that without confirm=true it returns a plan without execution, guiding appropriate usage.

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