db_rpc

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

Description states read-only, matching annotations, and adds that it returns signatures, return shape, language, and security, which goes beyond annotation hints. It also describes two modes of operation.

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?

Single sentence is concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. No waste, though could benefit from clearer separation of modes.

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?

Covers main usage modes and mentions return shape, language, security, but lacks explanation of many parameters. Output schema exists but not detailed. Adequate but with gaps.

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?

Only 'name' and 'list' are explained in the description, leaving 7 other parameters (e.g., limit, schema, argTypes) completely undocumented. With 0% schema description coverage, this is insufficient.

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?

Description explicitly states the tool inspects stored procedure/function signatures or enumerates routines, with specific verb 'inspect' and 'enumerate'. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like rpc_neighborhood and trace_rpc.

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?

Clearly implies usage for function questions (inspecting signatures or listing routines), but does not explicitly exclude other cases or mention alternatives. Context is clear enough for an agent.

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