list_databases

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the read-only safety profile, and the description does not contradict it. The added 'beserta ukurannya' provides useful context about the result content, but there is no mention of ordering, size units, or output format. This is acceptable for a simple read-only listing tool.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes meaning: it states the action, the resource, and the included detail about sizes.

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 zero-parameter, read-only listing operation, the description is sufficiently complete. It names the resource and the result content (sizes). Exact output format or size units are not specified, but these are minor gaps for a tool this simple.

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 zero properties, so there are no parameters to document. Since 0 params gets a baseline of 4, the description does not need to add parameter semantics. Nothing is missing here.

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 'Daftar' (list) and an unambiguous resource, 'semua database' (all databases), and adds the detail 'beserta ukurannya' (with sizes). This makes the tool's purpose immediately clear and distinguishes it from the sibling list_collections, which targets collections rather than databases.

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 specifies the scope ('semua database yang tersedia') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_collections or server_info. Usage is implied by the clear purpose, but no direct comparison or exclusion is provided.

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