Databases Describe Database

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description's only added behavioral signal is the set of properties returned, which is redundant with the output schema; it says nothing about permissions or failure modes.

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?

One compact sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no filler. It is slightly under-specified rather than over-long.

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?

For a one-parameter read with a full annotation set and an output schema, the description is sufficient: the agent knows what is described and what metadata comes back. The only missing piece is routing guidance against the DDL and list siblings.

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?

With a single parameter at 100% schema coverage, the schema already carries the meaningful guidance (quoting non-uppercase names exactly as list tools return them). The description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Describe') plus the resource ('database') and enumerates the returned facets (properties, owner, retention time, comment), so an agent knows exactly what metadata it yields. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from databases_get_database_ddl or databases_list_databases, which keeps it from a 5.

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 when-to-use statement, no prerequisites, and no mention of the sibling alternatives (get_database_ddl for DDL, list_databases for enumeration). The agent must infer that this is the metadata-inspection call from context alone.

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