List OceanBase MCP Capabilities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, safe, or does not modify state. While listing capabilities implies a read operation, agents benefit from explicit safety guarantees.

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 tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and contains no redundant or extraneous information.

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 absence of an output schema, the description should explain the return structure or format. It only lists what is included but not how the results are organized (e.g., as a list, JSON structure). Additionally, the parameter is undocumented, leaving the tool's completeness lacking for effective use.

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 one parameter ('profile') with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not mention the parameter at all, leaving its purpose completely undefined. The agent cannot infer how to use the optional profile parameter from the description alone.

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 lists specific resources: tool groups, tool versions, active compatibility mode, and read-only limits. It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('capabilities'), which distinguishes it from sibling list tools like ob_list_tables or ob_list_objects.

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. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate, which is especially problematic given many sibling list tools exist.

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