List databases

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no extra behavioral details (e.g., pagination, sorting, or potential side effects), but given the annotations, the bar is lower and the basic function is clear.

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, concise sentence with no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the action ('List') and clearly states the target resource, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 list operation, the description is adequate. It conveys the action and scope, and the required hostingId parameter is indicated in the schema. While it does not specify the exact nature of the returned list (e.g., names vs. details), that is not critical given the lack of an output schema and the simplicity of the operation.

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 provides descriptions for both parameters (userId and hostingId) with 100% coverage. The tool description itself does not elaborate on parameter usage, but the schema's built-in descriptions are sufficient, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies the resource ('databases') with a clear scope ('on a hosting service'). It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like ws_db_get (which retrieves a single database) and ws_db_stats (which provides statistics).

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 for listing all databases but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as ws_db_get or ws_db_users_list. The context of sibling tools makes the purpose clear, but the description itself lacks explicit when-to-use guidance.

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