db_promote_read_replica

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action and the return value, but does not disclose that promoting a read replica is likely irreversible, that it stops replication, or what impact it has on the original replica or primary database.

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 compact and front-loaded, with the core action stated first. The Args and Returns sections are each minimal and purposeful, adding useful parameter and output context without unnecessary fluff.

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, this is a state-changing, potentially irreversible operation with no annotations describing safety or side effects. The description omits important context such as prerequisites, irreversibility, impact on replication, and whether the original read replica endpoint remains usable.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for its single parameter, but the description adds valuable meaning: database_id is explicitly identified as 'the read replica database ID or label,' clarifying both the accepted format and the required resource type. This goes beyond the bare schema definition.

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 ('Promote') and a specific resource ('a read replica to a standalone database'), making the tool's action unambiguous. It clearly stands apart from siblings like db_create_read_replica and db_delete by describing the exact transformation it performs.

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, such as db_create_read_replica or db_delete. There is no mention of prerequisites, conditions, or context that would help an agent decide this is the correct operation.

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