List Hydra DB Context

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint as true, so the agent knows this is a safe, read-only operation. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond that, but it does not contradict annotations.

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 extremely concise at two sentences, with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it easy to scan.

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 simplicity of the tool (list operation, no output schema, well-defined parameters), the description is fairly complete. It could benefit from mentioning return format or pagination, but annotations cover the safety profile, and schema covers parameters.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the base level is 3. The description adds marginal value by explaining that 'kind' chooses the family and that 'source_ids' is an optional filter, but these are largely redundant with the schema descriptions.

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 'list' and the resources 'memories or ingested knowledge sources', with a scope that is further defined by the 'kind' parameter. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like hydra_db_list_memories and hydra_db_list_sources by offering a unified browsing experience.

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 gives a hint about using the 'kind' parameter to choose a family, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the more specific sibling tools, nor does it provide exclusion criteria or alternatives.

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