Database recycle bin

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds that the panel retains deleted databases so they remain recoverable, which is useful context, but says nothing about retention limits, scope, or how restoration is actually performed.

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 short sentences with the core meaning front-loaded and no filler. The second sentence's 'first' phrasing is slightly muddled but costs little.

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 with no output schema, describing the collection is nearly sufficient; an agent knows what it will get. Absent any note on the fields returned or whether retention is bounded, it falls just short of fully self-contained.

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 tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The empty schema is consistent with a parameterless listing operation.

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?

Clearly identifies the resource — databases that were deleted but are still restorable — which is distinct from db_list (live databases) and db_backups. The listing verb is only implied, and it never names the restore counterpart, but the concept is unmistakable.

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?

'Use db_delete_check first' points at a sibling, but that tool checks whether a delete is safe before deletion, not how to browse the recycle bin, so the routing advice is only tangential. There is no explicit statement of when to consult the recycle bin rather than db_list or db_backups.

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