Databases Create Database

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say what happens if the database already exists (even though if_not_exists defaults to true), what permissions are required, or how long the operation takes.

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?

A single short sentence with zero waste and the core purpose front-loaded, but the brevity is achieved by omitting information rather than by efficient phrasing. It is minimally viable rather than well-structured.

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 need no explanation, but for a create tool with three undocumented parameters and no notes on privilege requirements or the if_not_exists default, the description leaves significant gaps an agent would need in order to call it correctly.

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 description coverage is only 25% — only 'name' is documented, while 'comment', 'if_not_exists', and 'data_retention_time_in_days' have no descriptions anywhere. The description does not compensate by explaining the semantics of these parameters, particularly the default-true if_not_exists behavior which materially changes outcomes.

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 ('Create a new database') with the platform named, so an agent knows exactly what operation is performed. It does not distinguish itself from the close sibling databases_clone_database, which is also a database-creating operation, so sibling differentiation comes only from the name.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus databases_clone_database or schemas_create_schema, and no mention of prerequisites such as the CREATE DATABASE privilege or an active connection. The agent must infer all selection context from the tool name alone.

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