get_database_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates a read-only operation ('Get'), which is accurate. However, it does not mention any potential side effects, required permissions, or performance impacts, though none are likely given the simple read nature. The description is sufficient but not exhaustive.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the purpose and scope. Every word serves a purpose, with no unnecessary 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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should ideally detail the return structure. It lists the high-level items (version, size, etc.) but leaves ambiguity (e.g., units for 'size', format of 'server settings'). For a tool with no parameters and no annotations, the description is adequate but not fully complete for precise agent usage.

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 has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (vacuously). The description does not need to add parameter details, and it correctly omits any. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description provides no conflicting or missing information.

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 tool's purpose ('Get high-level PostgreSQL database runtime information') and lists specific items (version, size, active connection count, server settings). This distinctly separates it from sibling tools like get_table_stats (table-level) and get_slow_queries (query-level).

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 the tool is for overview database info, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like get_table_stats or list_schemas. With 11 sibling tools, some guidance on choosing this tool would be beneficial.

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