unpersist_database_models

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action but omits critical details such as whether the operation is destructive, reversible, requires special permissions, or what the consequences are for the database and its models.

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 sentence with no extraneous information. It is perfectly front-loaded and wastes no words.

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, no output schema), the description still falls short. It lacks context about the relationship to sibling tools like 'persist_database_models', behavioral details, and any return values or side effects. More completeness is needed for safe and 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 sole parameter 'id' is described in the schema as 'Database ID'. The description reiterates this with 'for a database' but adds no extra constraints, formats, or purpose beyond what the schema already provides, which is minimal.

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 ('Unpersist all persisted models') and the target resource ('for a database in Metabase'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'persist_database_models' (opposite) and 'unpersist_card' (single card), giving the agent a precise understanding of its function.

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 alternatives. For example, it does not mention that the sibling 'unpersist_card' handles individual models, nor does it specify prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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