libsql-start

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds no behavioral details beyond the endpoint. It does not contradict annotations but also does not supplement them with any new information.

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?

While extremely concise, the description is under-specified. It fails to earn its place by providing essential context, being too brief to be useful.

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 complexity (single parameter, no output schema), the description should at least clarify the purpose and expected outcome. It is completely inadequate for an agent to understand when to invoke it.

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 one required parameter (libsqlId) with no description (0% coverage). The description does not mention the parameter at all, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema definition.

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?

Description only gives HTTP method and endpoint 'POST /libsql.start', which vaguely hints at starting a libsql service but does not explicitly state the action or resource. The name 'libsql-start' is slightly more informative but the description adds no clarity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like libsql-stop, libsql-changeStatus, or libsql-deploy. The description gives no context for appropriate usage.

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