sync_database

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should fully disclose behavior. It mentions triggering a sync and returning a status, but lacks details about side effects, duration, safety profile (e.g., destructive? asynchronous?), or what 'sync' entails.

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 with three sentences, front-loading the purpose. The 'Args' and 'Returns' structure is clear and standard. No unnecessary words.

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?

Despite having an output schema (as per context signals), the description only cryptically says 'Returns: Sync status', which is insufficient. An agent needs to know the structure of the status, whether the sync is synchronous, and any potential failures. The tool's complexity (a sync operation) demands more context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. However, it merely restates the parameter name ('database_id') as 'The ID of the database to sync', adding no meaning beyond the schema. No additional format, constraints, or examples are given.

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 ('Trigger a sync') and the resource ('database's metadata'), making it distinct from sibling tools like 'list_databases' or 'get_database'. It is specific and unambiguous.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., for refresh operations) or when not to use it. The implied usage is present but no explicit context or exclusions.

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