MySQL JSON Search

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

The description mentions 'return matching paths,' which adds some behavioral context beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false). However, it does not detail aspects like case sensitivity, search scope across columns, or path format. The annotations already cover safety, so the description provides marginal additional value.

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, clear sentence that efficiently conveys the core functionality with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and outcome.

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?

Despite having output schema and annotations, the description is too brief for a tool with 22 parameters, many aliases. It does not explain essential parameters (e.g., table, column, searchValue) or how to structure a call. The lack of guidance on parameter usage reduces completeness for an agent.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, all parameters are already documented in the schema. The tool description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 without enhancing semantics.

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 searches for a string value in JSON columns and returns matching paths, which is a specific verb-resource combination. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling JSON tools like mysql_json_contains or mysql_json_extract, the focus on 'search' and 'return matching paths' distinguishes it adequately.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., mysql_json_contains for existence checks). The description lacks contextual cues for appropriate usage scenarios or prerequisites.

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