OCI MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'soft reset (graceful reboot)' implies a non-destructive operation, it doesn't specify what 'graceful' means in practice, whether this requires specific permissions, potential downtime implications, or what happens to active database connections. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 extremely concise - a single sentence that communicates the core functionality without any wasted words. It's front-loaded with the essential information and has no unnecessary elaboration.

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 mutation tool that performs a 'soft reset' on a database node with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what distinguishes this from other reset/reboot operations, what 'graceful' entails, potential side effects, or what the operation returns. Given the complexity of database node operations and the presence of similar sibling tools, more context is needed.

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 mentions no parameters, and with 0% schema description coverage for the single parameter 'db_node_id', the schema provides only basic typing information. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific context, but since there's only one parameter, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the agent can reasonably infer the parameter's purpose from the tool name.

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 action ('soft reset/graceful reboot') and the target resource ('a DB Node'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from its sibling 'reboot_db_node' or 'reset_db_node', which appear to be related operations on the same resource type.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'reboot_db_node' or 'reset_db_node' that appear in the sibling list. There's no mention of prerequisites, consequences, or appropriate contexts for choosing a 'soft reset' over other reset/reboot operations.

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