use_database

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

Annotations already cover idempotency and non-destructive nature, so the description adds value by disclosing that the switch takes effect immediately and requires no restart. This is a useful behavioral trait beyond the structured hints.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the key effect. Zero wasted words; perfectly concise and clear.

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?

For a simple switch operation with one parameter, no output schema, and annotations covering safety, the description provides all necessary context. The immediate-effect note is the only extra detail needed, and it is present.

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 single parameter 'database' is fully described in the schema with the same text as the description adds nothing beyond it. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the description does not enrich parameter meaning.

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 'switch' and the resource 'active database', with scope on the current MySQL server. It is unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like use_connection or connect, which deal with connections rather than database selection.

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 implies usage context—switching the active database—but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like use_connection or connect. It does not mention exclusions or conditions, leaving the choice to the agent's inference.

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