tracesDbAccess

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It states only that the tool retrieves information, implying a read operation, but gives no detail on side effects, required permissions, or what exactly 'database access information' includes. The behavior is vague and underdisclosed.

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, efficient sentence that states the core purpose without extraneous words. It earns its place with zero waste.

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?

With no output schema and a complex trace API context (many sibling tools), the description is too sparse. It does not explain what the returned 'database access information' looks like, how it relates to other trace data, or what the optional 'withSystemEvents' flag affects. A description this short leaves critical gaps for an agent deciding whether this tool serves its need.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, with descriptions for both 'id' and 'withSystemEvents'. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, and the schema descriptions are minimal but present. Since the schema already documents the parameters, the description doesn't need to compensate, but it also provides no extra context.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieves') and a clear resource ('database access information') with the target object ('a trace'), making the tool's core function clear. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling trace tools like tracesHitList or tracesStatements, but the resource name provides some differentiation.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus other trace-related tools. The description does not mention any prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid trace ID) or contexts where this should be preferred over alternatives.

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