Creates a new MySQL database user in cPanel with a specified username and password, automatically prefixing the username with the cPanel account name.
Create a new MySQL database user
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | Username (will be prefixed with cPanel username) | |
| password | Yes | Password for the new user |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It simply says 'Create a new MySQL database user' without explaining side effects, prerequisites, whether the user is created with no privileges, or naming conventions (cPanel prefix is only in the parameter schema). This is insufficient for a mutation tool.
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, focused sentence that states the core purpose with no filler or redundant information. It is appropriately concise for a simple create operation, though it lacks depth in other areas.
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 two-parameter create tool, the description is minimally viable but incomplete. It doesn't mention what happens after creation (e.g., whether the user needs privileges granted), potential error conditions, or return values (no output schema). Given the simplicity, this is acceptable but leaves obvious gaps.
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 the parameters are already well-documented ('Username (will be prefixed with cPanel username)' and 'Password for the new user'). The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 action: 'Create a new MySQL database user' with a specific verb (create) and resource (MySQL database user). It naturally distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_mysql_database, list_mysql_users, and delete_mysql_user.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention that this creates the user before setting privileges with set_mysql_privileges, or that the user is independent of databases. The description is purely a one-line definition with no usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.