ecp_mysql_create_db_user

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a valuable non-obvious behavior: db_username gets the account prefix auto-built. However, it does not disclose default privileges, reversibility, failure conditions, or what side effects creating this user has on the MySQL instance.

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?

Two short, single-purpose sentences. The core action is first, and the only non-obvious parameter detail is placed immediately afterward. No fluff or restated schema.

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 create call with two flat params the essential contract is present. But no annotations and no output schema place the entire burden on this description, which omits what privileges if any the user receives, what happens if the user already exists, and whether the operation is easily reversible via a sibling tool.

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%, leaving the description to add meaning. It does for db_username, telling the agent that a prefix is auto-applied, which affects how the parameter should be provided. The password property receives no semantic add–but password type is simple and largely inferable from the create-user intent.

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 the action clearly: 'Create an additional MySQL user.' It names the resource and DB type, distinguishing it from MSSQL/Postgres user siblings. It does not explicitly contrast with user-management siblings like mysql_change_db_user, but the create action itself makes the purpose unambiguous.

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 choose this tool over alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The only hint is 'additional', which is too thin to help an agent decide among mysql_create_db_user and related user-management tools.

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