create_database

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the create action and does not describe side effects, whether the operation is idempotent, what happens on conflict, or what gets returned. For a tool that mutates state, this is a notable gap.

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, front-loaded, waste-free sentence. It is concise and easy to scan, though it is so terse that it barely extends beyond the tool name.

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 two-parameter create operation, the schema covers the necessary inputs and the description states the core action. However, with no output schema, no annotations, and no mention of return values, prerequisites, or postconditions, the description is only minimally sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, and both parameters (name and type) have descriptions plus an example of valid type values. The description itself adds no parameter semantics, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already documents the inputs adequately.

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 action ('Create') and the resource ('a new database'), which is specific enough to distinguish it from sibling tools like list_databases or create_application. However, it does not mention any scope or context that might differentiate it from a more specific create-database-variant tool.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. It merely implies it should be used when a database needs to be created, but there is no explicit context or alternative routing.

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