List databases

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys an obviously read-only listing operation and reveals the returned information (databases and engines), but it does not mention whether any authorization, result format, or pagination behavior applies. For a zero-parameter list tool this is adequate but incomplete.

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 sentence with a clear verb and object, presented up front. It is not padded with redundant language and every word contributes meaning, making it ideal for fast operator scanning.

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 list operation, the one-line description is close to sufficient: it states the essential output, database names and engines. The lack of an output schema could have been be compensated by a slightly more explicit return format, but the description still covers the main context an agent needs to decide to call this tool.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 is appropriate. There is no parameter schema information that needs extra explanation, and the description correctly omits parameter guidance because there are none.

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 names the action ('List') and resource ('databases'), and adds a specific scope detail ('and their engines'). This directly distinguishes it from sibling tools such as list_tables and describe_table, which operate on table or schema 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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, but the naming of the tool and the sibling list imply it is for database discovery before moving to table-level operations. The description does not tell the agent when to select this instead of list_tables, so it only provides implied rather than explicit direction.

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