vibekit_enable_database

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a prerequisite (free tier needs add-on) but does not specify the outcome, side effects, or whether the operation is immediate, asynchronous, or potentially destructive. It only gives minimal behavioral context.

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, front-loaded with the action. The free-tier note is relevant and earns its place without unnecessary 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?

This is a simple one-parameter tool without an output schema. The description covers the core purpose and a key prerequisite, which is sufficient for typical use. However, it could be more complete by hinting at what happens after enabling (e.g., database status becomes available) or noting idempotency.

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 already describes appId as 'App ID or subdomain slug' with 100% coverage. The description adds nothing beyond 'for an app,' which is redundant with schema, so it does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 states the specific action: 'Enable a managed Postgres database for an app.' This clearly uses a verb ('Enable') plus resource ('managed Postgres database') and target ('app'), distinguishing it from siblings like database_status, database_schema, and database_query which are about viewing or querying.

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 the tool is used to enable a database, and provides a prerequisite about free tier needing an add-on. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use it versus alternative tools (e.g., database_status for checking) or mention any exclusions.

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