Create database

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation. The description adds that engine-specific fields in `extra` are validated per engine, providing useful context about constraints, but it doesn't go deeper into side effects, async behavior, or failure modes.

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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every clause adds value. No fluff or redundancy.

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 12-parameter create tool with no output schema, the description covers the key purpose, required fields, engine selection, and the `extra` parameter validation. It doesn't explain optional fields or return values, but it provides enough to select and invoke the tool correctly in most cases.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that `type` selects the engine, that environment_name and environment_uuid are alternatives (one is enough), and that `extra` carries engine-specific validated fields. This compensates for the low schema coverage, though some fields like name, image, and public_port remain undocumented.

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 opens with 'Create a database' and specifies the exact resource and action. It enumerates the supported engine types, making it unmistakable and distinct from sibling tools like createApplication and createService.

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 states the required fields (project_uuid, server_uuid) and clarifies that environment can be specified by either name or UUID. It doesn't explicitly contrast with alternative tools, but the context and prerequisites imply when this tool should be used.

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