superset_database_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that creation triggers a validation attempt and that the URI must be reachable from the server side—a non-obvious and important behavioral trait. However, it does not mention permission requirements or failure behavior, though the validation note adds significant transparency.

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 well-structured: a one-sentence purpose, a highlighted critical warning, and a labeled Args section. It is efficient and front-loaded with the most important caveat, with no redundant or filler 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?

The description covers all 8 parameters, their defaults, and the critical validation behavior. Since an output schema exists, the absence of return-value details is not a gap. For a create tool with this complexity, the description is thorough and self-sufficient.

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?

Despite the schema having 0% property descriptions, the description lists and explains every parameter, including examples for sqlalchemy_uri and a note that extra is a JSON string with engine_params and metadata_params. This fully compensates for the bare schema and adds meaningful context beyond the type/default 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 begins with 'Create a new database connection,' which clearly identifies the action (create) and the resource (database connection). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like superset_database_test_connection, superset_database_update, and superset_database_delete.

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 IMPORTANT note about Superset validating database availability on creation provides key usage context, advising that the URI must be reachable from the Superset server. This implies the tool is appropriate when a reachable URI is available, but it does not explicitly reference alternative tools or exclusion conditions.

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