Get the size of every table in a MySQL database to identify storage consumption and troubleshoot capacity issues.
Get size of each table in a MySQL database.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| db_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 burden. It only says it gets sizes, with no mention of read-only nature, auth requirements, or any side effects. It doesn't disclose whether it returns bytes vs. formatted sizes or whether it includes system tables/indexes. Minimal transparency for a read operation.
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 that clearly states the function. It is front-loaded and free of filler. No unnecessary words.
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?
No annotations, no output schema, no mention of units, no mention of whether it includes system databases, no guidance on permissions. The description is too sparse to be fully complete for an agent deciding between this and ecp_mysql_database_sizes.
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 1 required parameter (db_name) with no description. The description doesn't mention the parameter at all, so schema coverage is 0%. The agent must infer that db_name refers to the target MySQL database. No guidance on format, required vs optional, or behavior when db doesn't exist.
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
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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling list includes ecp_mysql_database_sizes (database-level sizes), and there are similar sizing tools for other engines (ecp_mssql_table_sizes, ecp_postgres_table_sizes), but the description doesn't distinguish the MySQL table-size tool from ecp_mysql_database_sizes or others. An agent must infer distinctions from names alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.