Create website database

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

Annotations already indicate this is a non-read-only, non-destructive mutation, and the description adds the side effect of creating a dedicated user. It does not mention prerequisites, duplicate handling, or other behavioral details, but the annotation coverage lowers the burden.

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 two short sentences with the primary action front-loaded. The second sentence adds useful emphasis about caller-provided values without unnecessary detail or repetition of the schema.

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 simple create operation with full schema coverage, the description conveys the core purpose, scope, and caller responsibility. A brief note about the website_uid parameter or duplicate existing resources would improve completeness, but nothing essential for invocation is missing.

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 schema already documents all parameters. The description adds little beyond the schema and actually omits website_uid from the list of caller-provided values, though it does emphasize that credentials must be supplied.

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 a specific action ('Creates a MySQL database with a dedicated user') and the target scope ('for an Agency Plan website'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like agency-hosting_createWebsiteDatabaseUserV1 and hosting_createAccountDatabaseV1.

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 by scoping the operation to Agency Plan websites, which helps an agent choose between agency-hosting and general hosting database tools. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it misses the top score.

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