database_status

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

Discloses what the tool reports (SQLite/PostgreSQL, connection status, key metrics) and requires an Enterprise license. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden.

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?

Two sentences plus a license note, front-loaded with purpose and actionable context. No wasted words.

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?

Fully adequate for a zero-parameter, read-only tool. Covers purpose, reported info, use cases, and licensing.

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?

No parameters exist; schema coverage is 100% (empty). The description adds no parameter info, but baseline for zero-param tools is 4.

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 ('Check') and resource ('database backend status and configuration'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like health_check or kiln_health by focusing on database details.

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?

Provides explicit use cases: 'Useful for verifying a PostgreSQL migration or diagnosing connectivity issues.' Does not explicitly state when not to use, but context is clear.

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