List databases

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds value by enumerating the returned fields, but says nothing about pagination behavior, whether the list is scoped to the panel or the whole server, or result ordering.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the resource and enumerates the returned fields with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple list tool.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully compensates by naming the columns returned, and the annotations plus schema cover safety and parameters. Minor gaps remain around pagination semantics and server scope, but the agent has enough to call it 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 description coverage is 100%, so p, limit, and search are fully documented in the schema itself, including the note that search is often the site id. The description adds nothing beyond this, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names the resource (all MySQL databases known to the panel) and the fields returned (user, access host, size), which is enough for an agent to distinguish it from db_tables, db_create, or db_backups. It lacks an explicit verb like 'list', but the name and content make the read-only listing intent unambiguous.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus its many siblings (db_tables, db_access_get, db_backups, site_list). No prerequisites, no exclusions, and no guidance about pagination or filtering workflow are given.

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