drop-database

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds valuable context by specifying that data files are deleted, which clarifies the irreversible nature beyond just 'destructive'. It doesn't mention permissions, rate limits, or confirmation steps, but the added detail about data files enhances transparency.

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 that front-loads the core action ('Removes the specified database') and adds necessary detail ('deleting the associated data files') without any wasted words. Every part earns its place by clarifying scope and impact.

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 destructive tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the action and data deletion, but lacks details on return values, error conditions, or dependencies. Given the high-risk nature, more context on irreversible effects or success indicators would improve completeness, but it's minimally viable.

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%, with the parameter 'database' fully documented in the schema as 'Database name'. The description does not add any additional meaning or examples beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without extra value.

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 action ('Removes') and the resource ('the specified database'), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'drop-collection' by specifying database-level deletion rather than collection-level. It's specific about what gets affected ('deleting the associated data files').

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'drop-collection' or 'delete-many', nor does it mention prerequisites such as ensuring the database exists or is not in use. It lacks explicit when/when-not instructions or named alternatives.

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