database_connect

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits, but it only says 'Connect'. It fails to mention that this likely creates a persistent session, may require cleanup via database_disconnect, how authentication works, or what happens on duplicate connections. The description is essentially a label, not an explanation.

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 short sentence, which is concise but not appropriately structured for a tool with 13 parameters and multiple connection types. It lacks any kind of organization or detail that would guide an agent, making it under-specified rather than elegantly concise.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (13 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what a successful connection yields, how connection sessions are managed, or how this tool fits into the broader database workflow. The omission of side effects and return behavior leaves the agent with insufficient context.

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 100%, and the schema itself includes detailed descriptions for all 13 parameters, including defaults and enums. The description adds no extra parameter insight, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema already thoroughly documents parameters.

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 the verb 'Connect' and the resource 'MySQL or PostgreSQL database', making the core purpose clear. However, it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like database_test_connection or database_connect_environment, which also relate to connecting or establishing sessions.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as database_test_connection or database_connect_environment. There are no mentions of prerequisites, connection types, or typical scenarios.

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