timeweb_get_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 only states that it retrieves detailed information, without disclosing specifics like response contents, error behavior, or permission requirements. The read-only nature is implied but not elaborated.

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 that gets straight to the point. It is front-loaded with the key action and resource. It is slightly too brief to include usage guidance, but it is efficient and not padded.

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 a simple getter, and the description covers the core purpose. However, with no output schema, it does not hint at what 'detailed information' includes or how the format parameter affects the response. It is adequate but leaves room for more contextual detail.

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 provides descriptions for both parameters (db_id and format), achieving 100% schema coverage. The description does not add additional insight beyond what the schema states, so the baseline 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 ('Get') and resource ('database cluster'), and explicitly says 'specific', distinguishing it from listing tools like timeweb_list_databases. It clearly communicates what the tool does.

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 purpose implies it is used when you need details for an existing database cluster, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions are stated, but the usage context is reasonably clear.

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