Delete a MySQL database user permanently. Irreversible; requires explicit confirmation to avoid accidental removal.
Delete an additional MySQL user. Irreversible.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| confirm | Yes | ||
| db_username | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'Irreversible,' which is a critical destructive trait, but it does not mention any other consequences, permissions, or side effects.
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 extremely short and front-loaded, with every word contributing. It could be improved by adding a note about the confirm parameter, but as written it is appropriately terse.
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?
The tool is destructive and has a required confirm parameter, but the description does not explain what 'additional' means or what confirmation is needed. The lack of output schema and annotations makes this minimal description insufficient for safe and correct invocation.
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 must compensate for the two parameters. It does not explain db_username or the confirm parameter at all, and the confirm boolean's purpose is left entirely to the schema.
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 names the exact operation: deleting a MySQL user. It is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like ecp_mysql_delete_database or ecp_mssql_delete_user.
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?
There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ecp_mysql_list_db_users, ecp_mysql_change_db_user, or ecp_mysql_revoke_privileges. The tool name implies the operation, but the description does not provide any usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.