extensions

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It lists actions but does not state whether the tool is read-only, requires special permissions, or impacts the system. The short phrase lacks depth about side effects or return behavior.

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 concise phrase with no redundant words. It front-loads the primary action (List) while adding two secondary actions compactly, though it could be more structured.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about expected results, compatibility checks, and dependency semantics. It is too brief to fully prepare an agent for invocation.

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 0% and the description does not mention the single optional parameter database_name. The empty schema description leaves the purpose of this parameter entirely unexplained, so the agent cannot infer its semantics.

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 identifies the resource (extensions) and three specific verbs (List, check, view) that define the tool's actions. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_objects or query by focusing solely on extensions management.

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 implies usage for extension-related tasks but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusion criteria or alternative tool names are mentioned, leaving the context implicit.

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