mysql_list_databases

Does 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 states it's a list operation, implying it's read-only and non-destructive, but doesn't confirm this explicitly. It also doesn't describe output format (e.g., array of strings), error conditions, or any side effects (e.g., whether it requires specific permissions). For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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, efficient sentence ('List all available databases') that is front-loaded with the core purpose. There is zero waste—every word earns its place by specifying the action, scope, and resource without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (0 parameters, simple list operation) and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but omits critical context like output format, error handling, and usage prerequisites. For a discovery tool in a database context, more completeness would be helpful, but it meets the minimum viable threshold.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, meaning there are no parameters to document. The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics, so it meets the baseline of 4 for tools with no parameters. It correctly implies no inputs are required for listing databases.

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 'List all available databases' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('databases') with the scope modifier 'all available'. It distinguishes from siblings like mysql_list_tables (which lists tables, not databases) and mysql_query (which executes queries). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from mysql_status (which might also provide database information), keeping it at 4 rather than 5.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing to connect first with mysql_connect), when it's appropriate (e.g., for discovery vs. querying), or exclusions (e.g., not for modifying databases). This leaves the agent with minimal context for tool selection.

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