mysql_delete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond this – no warning about permanence, data loss, or required permissions – so it contributes little behavioral context.

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 short and front-loads the core action, with the arg note kept brief. The 'Args:' block largely restates the schema, but there is no wasted prose.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, but for a destructive, single-parameter tool the description still omits permissions, side effects, and when to invoke it. It is insufficient for correct invocation given the operation's risk.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does marginally by clarifying the single parameter is a suffix of the DB name ('Суффикс имени БД'). It does not explain the format, the implied prefix, or validation constraints, so it only partially compensates for the coverage gap.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Убрать базу данных MySQL' = remove the MySQL database), so the core action is unambiguous. However, it does not differentiate from similar siblings like mysql_drop_access or site_delete, so it falls short of a 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (mysql_list, mysql_add, mysql_drop_access) or on preconditions. For a destructive operation this omission is notable, and no exclusions or context are given.

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