agency-hosting_listWebsiteDatabasesV1

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that it's a paginated list (read-only) and that each entry includes non-system users, which is useful behavioral detail. It doesn't overpromise or contradict anything, but it omits potential error conditions or auth requirements, though these are not critical for a simple list tool.

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?

Description is two sentences, front-loaded with the return statement, and no fluff. Every sentence adds value: first states the purpose, second details entry content.

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 simple list tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose, pagination, and entry content. It could mention ordering or additional result details, but given the tool's simplicity, it's sufficiently complete.

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 coverage is 100% and the description adds little beyond it. It mentions pagination, which reinforces the purpose of page and per_page, but doesn't clarify defaults or constraints. The description's mention of 'non-system users' adds about the response but not about the parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states it returns a paginated list of MySQL databases for an Agency Plan website, specifying the exact resource and scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like hosting_listAccountDatabasesV1 by emphasizing 'Agency Plan website', though it doesn't name alternatives.

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?

While it doesn't explicitly say when to use vs alternatives, it clearly implies usage for Agency Plan websites through the scope declaration. It doesn't mislead but lacks explicit exclusion of non-Agency contexts. Given the sibling hosting_listAccountDatabasesV1, it could be clearer, but the context is adequate.

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