List MySQL connections

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-derivable behavior: 'Passwords are never returned,' which tells the agent the connection secrets are redacted and it can safely surface this output to the user.

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?

Three short sentences, zero waste: what is returned first, the security guarantee second, the usage trigger third. Front-loaded and scannable.

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 zero-required-param read-only discovery tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns, what it withholds (passwords), and when to call it. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 one optional parameter (response_format) and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents the enum and its meaning. The description adds nothing about rendering format, which is acceptable given the schema does the work — the baseline 3 applies when coverage is high.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (MySQL connections), and enumerates the payload returned: connection IDs, environments, databases, and effective access modes. The 'MySQL' qualifier plus the connection-registry framing cleanly separates it from the sibling mongo_list_connections and redis_list_connections.

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?

'Use this before other tools when the connection ID is unknown' gives an explicit precondition and a discovery role relative to every other mysql_* tool. It stops short of a when-not clause (e.g., what to do when the ID is already known), so it is clear context rather than full routing guidance.

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