rotate_database_password

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false; the description adds the requirement for database and destructive access, which is a permission prerequisite rather than behavioral detail. It does not disclose consequences like invalidating existing sessions or the need to update client configurations, but it does not contradict annotations and reinforces the destructive nature.

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 with the action front-loaded, making it easy to scan. However, it is arguably too sparse, omitting details that could be included without much length.

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 destructive tool with two parameters, no output schema, and zero schema descriptions, this description is insufficient. It lacks guidance on when rotation is appropriate, what parameters mean, and what side effects will occur, making it difficult for an agent to invoke correctly without external knowledge.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain either parameter. It mentions 'database' but does not clarify that database_id is required and that server_id is an optional qualifier. No additional semantic meaning is provided beyond the schema titles.

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 'rotate' and identifies the resource 'database password,' clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_database, delete_database, and list_databases. It is unambiguous about what operation is performed.

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 states requirements (database and destructive access) but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites beyond permissions. For example, it doesn't mention that this should be used for credential rotation or what happens to existing connections.

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