List database remote connections

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

Annotations already communicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral detail about what constitutes a remote host, including IPv4/IPv6 and '%' wildcard. It does not mention pagination or default behavior when domain is omitted, but nothing contradicts the 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 two sentences long, front-loads the core purpose, and includes the filter usage without unnecessary filler. Every sentence earns its place.

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 read-only listing tool with only two well-documented parameters, the description gives enough context: what is returned, what the values mean, and how to narrow by domain. There is no output schema, but the description adequately conveys the return concept even if it does not specify the exact response shape.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the domain filter's meaning and gives the '%' wildcard context, adding slight value. The username parameter, however, is only described as 'username parameter' in both schema and description, so it adds no real semantic value.

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 a specific action and resource: 'Returns the remote-access rules for the specified account' and clarifies these are the remote hosts allowed to connect. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like create/delete remote connection and database-listing tools.

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 clear context for when to use the tool and specifically instructs how to use the domain filter to narrow results to a particular domain. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion cases, but the usage context is clear enough.

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