Insert a document into a MongoDB collection by specifying database, collection, credentials, and the document data, with a confirmation flag to execute safely.
Insert a document into a collection.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| confirm | Yes | ||
| db_name | Yes | ||
| document | Yes | ||
| password | Yes | ||
| db_username | Yes | ||
| collection_name | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It conveys that this is a write operation by saying 'insert,' but it does not disclose that the call requires explicit confirmation (confirm=true), database credentials, or that it mutates MongoDB state.
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 efficient sentence with no filler, front-loading the verb and core object. It is concise, but the conciseness comes at the cost of informative detail.
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 tool with six required parameters, including credentials and a confirmation gate, the description is too sparse to support correct invocation. With no annotations, no output schema, and zero parameter documentation, the agent must rely on guessing for critical aspects like how the confirm field works and how credentials are used.
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 0%, and the description adds no meaning beyond what parameter names already imply. Six parameters are required, but db_name, collection_name, db_username, password, document, and confirm are all left semantically unexplained.
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 clear action—'Insert a document'—and identifies the target resource, 'a collection.' This is enough to distinguish it from sibling Mongo operations like update_document, delete_document, and browse_documents, though it does not explicitly compare itself to them.
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?
No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives, when not to use it, or any prerequisites. There is no mention of the required confirm flag, credential requirements, or relationship to ecp_mongo_update_document.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.