db_list_errors

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not specify that the tool is read-only, whether authentication is needed, or any side effects. The description only states it lists errors, which is insufficient for a tool lacking annotations.

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 very concise, with a clear main sentence followed by parameter documentation. Every sentence is useful, and there is no extraneous information.

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 tool has an output schema (not shown), the description does not need to explain return values. However, it lacks context on ordering, error handling, or performance implications. For a simple list tool with two parameters, it is adequate but not comprehensive.

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%, so the description must compensate. It provides meaningful context for both parameters: backup_id is 'Numeric ID of the backup job (leave empty for all jobs)' and limit is 'Maximum number of entries to return (default 20)'. This adds value beyond the schema's type and default.

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 verb 'List', the resource 'recent error log entries', and the scope 'from the local SQLite database'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like db_list_operations and db_list_notifications.

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 listing errors but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like db_get_operation_log or server status tools. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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