ssh_db_dump

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It transparently notes that the database is not modified, explains engine-specific flags, states that compression defaults to true with gzip, and warns that the tables list is ignored for MongoDB. It could also clarify overwrite behavior for an existing output file, but the core side effects are disclosed.

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 dense but efficient. The main purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and every subsequent sentence adds non-obvious operational detail without repetition or 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?

For a 10-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the most important operational nuances: read-only behavior, database-specific flags, compression, and table-list limitations. It is slightly incomplete regarding what happens if the remote output file already exists and what the tool returns after completion, but these are minor gaps.

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 adds meaningful context beyond the schema: MySQL flags, PostgreSQL custom format and pg_restore compatibility, the compression default, and the MySQL/PostgreSQL-only behavior of the tables 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?

The description states a specific action, 'Dumps a database to a file on the remote server over SSH,' and clarifies it 'reads data only and does not modify the database.' This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like ssh_db_import, ssh_db_query, and ssh_db_list.

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 clear context for when to use the tool by emphasizing read-only behavior and listing supported database types. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for write operations, but the read-only framing makes the intended use unmistakable.

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