phpmyadmin_sso

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says a session is created; it does not mention side effects, session lifetime, access scope, permissions, or whether creating a session causes existing sessions to be invalidated. Some context is present via 'database-scoped SSO', but this is too thin for a session-creation 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 brief, front-loaded, and contains no filler. The main action appears first, followed by a single parameter explanation. Every sentence 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 single-optional-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is minimally adequate: it names the action and explains the one parameter. But it leaves gaps around default behavior, when database-scoped SSO is needed, and any side effects. The output schema likely covers return values, so the main missing pieces are usage and behavioral context.

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. It does add meaning beyond the raw schema: 'Optional database name for database-scoped SSO' clarifies that the parameter is optional and scopes the session to a specific database. This is useful though it stops short of explaining what happens when the parameter is omitted.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Create a phpMyAdmin SSO session.' It is clear what the tool does and it is distinct from the related session_* and db_* siblings. However, it does not explicitly contrast itself with any sibling tool, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or scenarios where database-scoped versus global SSO is appropriate. The only usage hint is that 'database' is optional, which is implied by the parameter itself.

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