Switch Default Database

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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description explicitly states the tool 'switches the default database' and affects subsequent tool calls—this is a session-state mutation, directly contradicting the read-only annotation. Because of this annotation contradiction, behavioral transparency must be scored 1 per rubric, despite the otherwise rich behavioral notes.

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 well-organized with clear sections: main purpose, when to use, behavioral notes, and return value. Every sentence adds relevant information, and the most important behavior is front-loaded. No unnecessary repetition or filler exists.

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?

The description covers prerequisites (config listing), idempotency, lazy connection behavior, unreachable-database handling, session scoping, and return value. There is no output schema, but the return format is described. For a state-changing tool with one parameter, this is complete.

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 single parameter 'database' is fully described in the schema, and the description adds meaningful constraints and behavior: the target must be listed in pgautopilot.json, is lazily connected on first use, and that unreachable targets lead to connection errors later. This exceeds the baseline expected with 100% schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Switches the default database for subsequent tool calls.' It clearly explains the scope and effect without ambiguity, and the tool is distinct from sibling tools like db_list_databases and db_table_info. This is a clear, actionable definition.

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 'When to use' section provides explicit contexts, such as after db_list_databases or when switching between production and analytics databases. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool, but the usage context is sufficiently clear to guide tool selection.

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