update_saved_query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states that unspecified fields are preserved (partial update semantics) and that confirm=true is required to write, effectively explaining the two-phase preview/commit behavior. This is valuable context beyond what the schema alone provides.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the primary purpose and key constraints. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

The description covers the essential workflow (preview vs. write, partial updates) but omits details about the meaning of several parameters, possible error conditions, or return behavior. With no annotations and no output schema, this is a clear gap, though the core usage is understandable.

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 by explaining parameter meanings. It only clarifies the role of confirm (required to write) but provides no explanation for other parameters like sql, db_id, extra_json, or template_parameters. Given 10 parameters, this is a significant gap.

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 tool can 'preview or update a saved query', which is a specific action on a specific resource. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like get_saved_query (read) and create_saved_query (new) by focusing on the update/preview workflow for existing queries.

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 useful context by indicating this tool is for previewing or updating an existing saved query, and that confirm=true is required to actually write. It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the preview/update workflow and confirmation requirement imply a clear usage pattern.

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