list_knowledge_bases

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool does but doesn't describe how it behaves—such as whether it returns a paginated list, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what format the output takes. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's operation.

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, clear sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with no wasted words. It's front-loaded and efficiently communicates the essential information, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 the tool's simplicity (zero parameters, no output schema), the description is adequate but incomplete. It covers the basic purpose but lacks behavioral context (e.g., output format, authentication needs) that would help an agent use it effectively, especially with no annotations to fill those gaps.

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 zero parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100%, so there's no need for parameter details in the description. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, as the description appropriately focuses on the tool's purpose without unnecessary parameter explanations.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('all knowledge bases in MindsDB'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_databases' or 'list_tables' beyond specifying the resource type, which prevents a perfect score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_databases' or 'search_kb'. It lacks context about prerequisites, such as whether a database connection is needed, or any explicit when-not-to-use scenarios.

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