combell_mysql_users_set_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description merely states the action without adding context about side effects, reversibility, or impact on existing sessions. It adds minimal value beyond the annotations.

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 with no fluff. It is appropriately sized for a simple operation, though the lack of detail is a completeness issue rather than a conciseness issue.

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 tool with three parameters and zero schema coverage, the description is under-specified. It does not clarify parameter meanings, expected values, or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer critical information. The description should compensate for the missing schema documentation but does not.

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%, and the description provides no explanation of the three parameters (database_name, user_name, enabled). The meaning of 'enabled' is implied but not explicitly defined, and the relationship between parameters is unclear.

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 a specific action (enable/disable) on a specific resource (MySQL database user). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create, delete, and set_password without ambiguity.

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 when to use the tool (toggle user status) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or conditions. It doesn't say 'use this instead of deleting' or provide context on when enabling/disabling is appropriate.

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