panelica_remote_mysql_post_v1_remote_mysql_hosts

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

The description explicitly states 'Required scopes: databases:write' and 'Mutating: changes server state', adding auth and side-effect context beyond the annotations. However, it largely restates the readOnlyHint=false signal and does not disclose idempotency consequences or error/response behavior, so it adds moderate but limited value.

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 compact and front-loaded: the purpose comes first, followed by HTTP method, category, required scopes, and mutating behavior. Every line carries distinct operational information and there is no filler.

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 creation tool, the description omits the actual request body structure, required fields, and any return details. The only parameter is explicitly unschemaed, so an agent cannot reliably construct a valid create request from the MCP definition alone.

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?

There is only one 'body' parameter and the schema describes it as application/json with no statically declared schema, so the description adds no field-level meaning. Since schema description coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3, but the opaque 'see API docs' body leaves the agent without concrete payload guidance.

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 opens with 'Create remote MySQL host', which is a specific verb and resource, and also gives the HTTP POST endpoint. It clearly identifies the action but does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling GET/DELETE remote MySQL tools beyond the 'create' verb.

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 choose this tool over alternatives such as listing or deleting remote MySQL hosts. The description implies creation but never states exclusions, prerequisites, or conditions that would route an agent here instead of a sibling.

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