faucet_list_services

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: the exact shape of each returned record and the role-based access filter ('Only services your role has access to are listed'), which tells the agent results may be silently scoped. It omits pagination/empty-result behavior, so not a 5.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then return shape, then usage order. Every sentence carries information an agent needs; nothing is padding.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by naming the returned fields (name, driver type, active status, access mode). Combined with the zero-parameter schema and readOnly annotation, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. No parameter-level gaps are possible here.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all database services configured in Faucet') and enumerates the fields returned, which lets an agent distinguish it from faucet_list_tables and faucet_query without opening a schema. The resource scope is unambiguous.

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 this first to discover available databases before querying' gives explicit sequencing relative to the query tools, which is genuine when-to-use guidance. It stops short of naming the closest alternative (faucet_list_tables) or stating when not to use it, so it is clear but not complete.

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