execute_read_query

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the query is validated and executed under row, byte, timeout, and concurrency limits, providing some behavioral context. However, it does not explicitly state read-only nature (though SELECT implies it), describe behavior when limits are exceeded, or mention connection prerequisites.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action 'Execute', and contains no filler or redundant information. Every word adds value.

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?

Although an output schema exists and return values are covered, the description lacks important context such as the need for an existing connection (implied by required connection_id), the meaning of 'validated' (whether pre-validation via validate_sql is required), and the exact consequence of concurrency limits. Given the tool's complexity and sibling tools, more context would improve usability.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It only hints at 'limits' which loosely maps to max_rows and timeout_seconds, but leaves connection_id, parameters, and the validation requirement for sql unexplained. This is insufficient for an agent to understand how to set each parameter effectively.

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 uses a specific verb 'Execute' and names the resource as 'one validated SELECT', clearly indicating a read-only SQL query operation. It distinguishes itself from siblings such as execute_mongo_find (MongoDB) and generate_and_execute_query (generating plus executing).

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 usage for executing SELECT statements and mentions limits, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like explain_query or generate_sql. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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