list_database_schemas

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description must convey behavioral traits. It implies a read-only operation, but does not disclose potential limitations (e.g., access restrictions, ordering, pagination). The behavior is straightforward for a listing tool, but more detail would improve transparency.

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 short and includes a clear structure with Args and Returns sections. However, the Returns line could be considered repetitive as the purpose already states the outcome. Overall, it is efficient.

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 (one parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It clearly states the action, input, and output, leaving no obvious 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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. The 'Args' section provides a brief description of 'database_id' as 'The ID of the database', which adds basic context but is minimal and somewhat redundant given the parameter name.

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 ('List all schemas') and the resource ('in a specific database'), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'list_tables' or 'get_schema_tables'.

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, nor does it mention when not to use it or any prerequisites. It only states the basic functionality.

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