superset_list_databases

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List all databases configured in Superset' transparently indicates a read-only listing operation. It does not mention pagination or permissions, but for a simple list tool, the behavior is adequately disclosed. The example '(e.g. Snowflake)' adds practical context without being misleading.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. The first sentence states the action and resource, and the second provides a concrete use case. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

The tool is simple (no parameters) and has an output schema, so the return value structure is likely covered elsewhere. The description explains the tool's purpose and a key use case (finding database_id for listing datasets). It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly, though it could mention that the output contains database metadata.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the description does not need to explain any. The baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately adds no unnecessary parameter details. The mention of Snowflake serves as an example rather than parameter guidance.

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's function: 'List all databases configured in Superset'. The verb 'List' and resource 'databases' are specific, and the example '(e.g. Snowflake)' adds clarity. It is clearly distinguished from sibling tools that handle datasets, dashboards, and charts.

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 a clear use case: 'Use to find database_id for listing datasets.' This tells the agent when to use the tool, specifically when a database_id is needed for dataset-related operations. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is clear enough.

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