list_databases

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

The description discloses that the return value is a Markdown-formatted list, providing behavioral insight beyond the input schema. No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does not mention permissions or side effects, but for a read-only listing, the output format is sufficient.

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: one sentence for the action and one for the return format. No unnecessary words, and the structure is clear and front-loaded.

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 zero parameters and the presence of an output schema (implied by the return description), the description is fully adequate. It states what the tool does and what it returns, leaving no obvious gaps for a simple listing tool.

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 tool has no parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty). The description does not need to add parameter information, so the baseline for zero parameters applies. No additional semantic details are required.

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 'List all databases' and the resource 'connected to Metabase'. The tool name and description match perfectly, and it distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_database' (singular) and 'sync_database' by being a simple listing operation.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_database' for a specific database or 'list_tables' for tables. The use case is implied by the name, but without explicit context or exclusions, the score is average.

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