db_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does meaningful work: it discloses that the default call returns a masked/disinfected connection list plus default connection status, and that passing db returns specific connection details. Missing only secondary traits like permissions or error behavior.

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?

Three front-loaded sentences, each carrying distinct information: purpose, mode-dependent behavior, then usage routing. No padding or repetition.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are covered elsewhere, and the description still rounds out mode behavior, the parameter's role, and usage context. Adequate for a single-optional-param metadata probe; only auth/permission context is absent.

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% (the lone 'db' property has no description), so the description must compensate. It does: db is an alias that triggers a precise probe of that named connection, and omitting it changes the result set. This meaningfully exceeds the bare string 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?

States a specific verb and resource: retrieves database environment metadata and a connection list. This is clearly distinct from the SQL/schema siblings (sql_query, schema_list_tables, etc.), though it never names a sibling to differentiate itself explicitly.

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?

Gives a concrete when-to-use rule: in multi-database environments, call this first to obtain the available connection aliases. It also explains the two invocation modes (default vs. db=alias). It stops short of stating any exclusion or naming an alternative tool for other needs.

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