create_session_sandbox_database

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It explains naming prefix and return format but does not mention side effects, error handling, or permissions. For a simple creation tool, this is adequate but not fully transparent.

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 concise and well-structured: purpose statement, argument description, example, return type. Every sentence adds value and is front-loaded with the main action.

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 simple create tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is complete enough. It explains input, behavior, and output. Could mention constraints like uniqueness or permissions, but overall sufficient.

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 0%, so the description carries full burden. It defines 'name' as a suffix without prefix and provides an example that clarifies usage, adding significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool creates a new sandbox database for the current session, specifying the naming convention with prefix. It is distinct from sibling tools like show_databases and execute_sql.

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 indicates when to use the tool (to create a sandbox database) but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives. The context of siblings implies it is for setup, not for querying or listing.

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