ecp_mysql_delete_database

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly discloses the most critical behavioral trait: the operation is irreversible. It does not mention confirmation requirements or side effects on dependent objects, but for a simple delete-database operation, the irreversibility warning is substantive and honest.

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 sentences with no filler. 'Delete a MySQL database' states the core action and resource, and 'Irreversible' adds the critical consequence in one word. Every element 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 destructive two-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate but thin. It identifies the resource and the irreversible consequence, but it does not state that confirm must be true, what happens on success/failure, or any prerequisites. The schema fills the confirmation gap, but the overall context is minimal.

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%, so the description needed to compensate, but it does not explain either db_name or confirm. The confirm parameter's const true is present in the schema, which helps, but the description itself adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the tool name.

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 ('Delete') and the resource ('a MySQL database'), and includes 'Irreversible' as a scope-defining consequence. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_database, list_databases, drop_table, and truncate_table without needing to open the schema.

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 such as backup/export, truncate, or dropping individual tables. The intended use is only implied by the name and the verb 'Delete'; there are no explicit conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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