get_database

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and it adequately conveys a read-only retrieval operation. It states what the call returns (schema and properties), but does not mention permissions, errors, or rate-limit 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?

Two sentences, no filler, and the core action is front-loaded. Every sentence adds useful 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?

For a one-parameter get operation, the description is largely complete: it explains the purpose, return object type, and likely user intent. It could still clarify how this relates to query_database or what 'properties' includes, but the information is otherwise sufficient.

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 input schema already documents database_id at 100% coverage, so the baseline applies. The description adds no extra meaning about the format, origin, or use of the database_id 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 a specific verb and resource: retrieve database schema and properties. It is clear about the informational vs content-oriented nature by mentioning structure, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling query_database.

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 an explicit usage condition: use when the user wants to understand database structure. It does not provide exclusion criteria or name alternative tools, so it stops short of a full 5.

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