List all users in a managed database using its ID or label to view usernames and permissions.
List all users in a managed database.
Args: database_id: The database ID or label (e.g., "my-mysql-db" or UUID)
Returns: List of database users with their permissions
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| database_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden of behavior disclosure. It states the tool returns a list of users with permissions, which implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly declare safety, authorization requirements, or potential error conditions. The gap is moderate given the simplicity of a listing 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 concise and well-structured, with the purpose front-loaded and a clean Args/Returns format. Every sentence contributes necessary information with no filler.
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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: parameter meaning and return type. It does not mention preconditions like database existence or permission requirements, but these are not critical for a straightforward listing tool, making it sufficiently complete.
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 input schema only defines database_id as a string with no description. The description explains that it is the database ID or label, providing examples ('my-mysql-db' or UUID), which adds meaningful value beyond the schema and compensates for the 0% schema coverage.
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 (List) and resource (all users) within a managed database, distinguishing it from sibling tools like db_get_user (single user) and db_create_user (create user). It is unambiguous and specific.
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 implies when to use it (to list all users) but does not explicitly state when to avoid it or mention alternatives such as db_get_user for individual user retrieval. No exclusions or context are provided beyond the basic purpose.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.