fb_use_database

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and it does disclose two meaningful traits: the change is session-wide (all subsequent calls without 'db_alias' use it) and the lookup is fuzzy (exact, case-insensitive, substring on alias or tag). It omits failure behavior when no or multiple matches are found, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: purpose first, matching behavior second, downstream effect third. No redundancy or filler.

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 one-parameter session-state tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, matching rules, and the persistent effect on later calls. Only ambiguity/error handling (no match, multiple matches) is left unaddressed.

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 single 'alias' parameter is titled only. The description compensates well by explaining the matching semantics (exact name, case-insensitive, substring against alias or tag, with a concrete 'auditoria' -> 'erp_auditoria' example), which an agent needs to pass the right value.

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?

States a specific action (set the active database for the session) on a specific resource (the configured catalog), and the scope ('sessão') distinguishes it from sibling tools like fb_list_databases or fb_create_config. An agent can tell immediately this is a state-setting tool, not a listing or querying tool.

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?

It clearly frames when to use it: to define the active database so that later calls omitting 'db_alias' inherit it. It does not explicitly name or exclude alternatives (e.g., passing db_alias per call instead of setting state), so 4 rather than 5.

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