MySQL Exec

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

The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: it specifies 'one SQL statement' (limiting batch operations), 'if policy allows' (implying authorization checks), and 'write-capable' (clarifying operation type). Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and non-idempotent, but the description reinforces this with 'write-capable' and policy constraints, without contradiction.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action ('Run one write-capable SQL statement') and efficiently adds constraints ('on a configured MySQL environment if policy allows'). Every word contributes essential information without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (destructive write operation with policy constraints), the description is complete: it clarifies purpose, usage context, and behavioral traits. With annotations covering safety aspects (destructiveHint=true) and an output schema existing, the description effectively supplements without needing to detail return values or repeat structured data.

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 100%, so parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description does not add specific meaning to individual parameters beyond implying 'env' and 'sql' are required (matching schema) and hinting at policy constraints for 'database' and 'sql'. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as schema carries the burden.

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 specific action ('Run one write-capable SQL statement'), the resource ('on a configured MySQL environment'), and distinguishes from its sibling mysql_query by specifying 'write-capable' versus presumably read-only querying. It provides precise scope with 'one SQL statement' and policy constraints.

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?

The description explicitly states 'if policy allows' and specifies 'write-capable SQL statement,' which implies usage for write operations versus read queries handled by mysql_query. However, it does not explicitly name the sibling tool as an alternative or detail when not to use this tool beyond policy constraints.

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