drop_database

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states 'Drop a database' and a confirmation requirement, but omits details like irreversibility, required permissions, side effects, or prerequisites (e.g., database must exist). This is insufficient for a destructive operation.

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 extremely concise at two sentences and front-loaded with the action. Every word earns its place, with no unnecessary information.

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?

Given that this is a destructive tool with 3 parameters (1 required) and no output schema, the description is far too sparse. It fails to explain the confirmation parameter's role, connection defaults, or return behavior, leaving critical gaps for safe usage.

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?

The schema covers 67% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what is in the schema; it merely repeats the confirmed requirement. It does not explain parameter formats, constraints, or relationships.

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 verb 'drop' and resource 'database', making the purpose unambiguous. It also mentions a required confirmation. However, it does not differentiate from other destructive tools like truncate_table or delete_rows, which are siblings.

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 only says 'Requires confirmed=true', which is minimal usage guidance. It does not specify when to use this tool versus other destructive operations, nor does it provide context for when not to use it.

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