Get phpMyAdmin link

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 'direct sign-on' detail and the full-name requirement, but it does not address link expiry, permissions, or other behavioral traits. No contradiction with 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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: outcome, use case, and a key constraint. No filler or redundant wording.

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?

The tool is simple and read-only, and annotations cover the safety profile. The main gap is the required username parameter, which is not explained beyond a tautological schema label, so callers may not know which username to supply.

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 the baseline is 3. The description restates the database name requirement already in the schema, but adds nothing about the username parameter, whose schema description is a tautology ('username parameter').

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?

Description states a specific verb 'Returns' and a clear resource: 'direct sign-on link to phpMyAdmin for the specified database'. It is distinct from all sibling tools, as none other generates a phpMyAdmin link.

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?

Provides explicit context: 'Use this when a visual database interface is needed for SQL queries, imports, exports, or table management.' It does not mention exclusions or name alternatives, but the use case is clear enough for an agent to select this tool confidently.

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