ddev_export_db

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors: output to file or stdout, supported compression types, and the default target database. It also shows how MCP arguments translate to CLI flags. However, it does not mention side effects, permission needs, or error conditions, leaving some behavioral 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 compact and well-structured. It leads with the core purpose, then provides usage, flag mapping, and a pointer to full help. Every sentence is informative with minimal redundancy.

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 moderate-complexity tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential usage context: command syntax, defaults, and where to find more details. It lacks examples, but the pointer to 'ddev help export-db' mitigates this. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke the tool 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the mapping between MCP args and CLI flags (e.g., file → -f/--file, targetDb → -d/--database, compressionType → --gzip|--bzip2|--xz) and by stating defaults (targetDb default 'db', compression default gzip), which go beyond the schema descriptions.

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's function: "Dump a database to a file or stdout." It specifies the resource (database), the action (dump/export), and output options (file or stdout), distinguishing it from sibling tools like ddev_import_db and ddev_snapshot.

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 concrete usage guidance including the command syntax, MCP-to-CLI flag mappings, and default values (targetDb default "db", compression default gzip). It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select this tool for exporting databases.

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