dba_databaseVersion

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool 'Get[s]' information, implying a read-only operation, but does not specify whether it requires authentication, has rate limits, returns structured or raw data, or any error conditions. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand how to invoke it safely and effectively.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core purpose ('Get Teradata database version information'), making it easy to parse. Every part of the sentence contributes directly to understanding the tool's function.

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 has 0 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate by stating what it does. However, it lacks details on return format (e.g., version string or structured data), which is critical for an agent to process results. For a simple read tool, this omission reduces completeness, though the low complexity keeps it from being severely inadequate.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, meaning no parameters are documented in the schema. The description does not add parameter details, which is appropriate since there are none to describe. It implicitly confirms the lack of inputs by not mentioning any, aligning with the 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Get') and resource ('Teradata database version information'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'dba_databaseSpace' or 'dba_sessionInfo' by focusing specifically on version data rather than space or session details. However, it lacks explicit sibling differentiation beyond the inherent scope difference.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, context (e.g., for system monitoring or compatibility checks), or exclusions. Given siblings like 'dba_databaseList' or 'dba_featureUsage', there is no explicit comparison to help an agent choose appropriately.

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