List all MySQL database users on the cPanel account to identify and manage database access.
List MySQL database users on the account.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "list_database_users"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds contextual details like 'on the account' and 'MySQL', indicating scope and database type, but it does not mention return format, permissions, pagination, or explicitly confirm a read-only operation, leaving some ambiguity.
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 sentence with no filler, front-loaded with the action 'List' and the resource. Every word adds value, making it highly concise and structured for quick understanding.
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 simple zero-parameter list tool, the description covers the essential information: what it does, the resource type, and the scope. No output schema is present, but the description's simplicity makes it complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly.
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?
The tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% trivially. The description adds meaning by specifying the account scope, which is not captured in the schema. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description does not detract from it.
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 tool lists MySQL database users on the account, using the specific verb 'List' and resource 'MySQL database users'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_databases (which lists databases) and create_database_user (which creates users).
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 implies usage by naming the resource and scope, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_databases or grant_database_privileges. There is no exclusion or comparison provided, so the guidance remains implied rather than explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.