hosting_createAccountDatabaseRemoteConnectionV1

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

The description states it 'allows' a connection, implying a mutation. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It does not disclose side effects, security implications, or return value. The description is straightforward but not deeply transparent.

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 two sentences: one for purpose, one for key usage details. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with purpose. Concise and efficient.

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?

The description covers key aspects for a creation tool: what it does, required parameters with guidance. However, it misses context on the 'username' parameter, does not mention that the database must exist, and does not indicate return behavior (though no output schema).

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%, providing baseline. The description adds meaningful context for 'ip' (IPv4/IPv6 or '%') and 'name' (must be full name from list databases). However, it does not clarify the 'username' parameter beyond the schema's vague 'username parameter'.

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 the tool's purpose: allowing a remote host to connect to a specified database. It specifies the action (allow) and resource (database), and provides guidance on parameter values. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like delete or list remote connections.

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 gives specific guidance on how to use the 'ip' and 'name' parameters (e.g., '%' for any host, full name from list databases endpoint). However, it lacks context on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as creating a database or managing other connection types.

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