run_sql_plus_plus_query

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

Annotations are empty, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the query runs on the specified scope and bucket, and that scope context is auto-set. It does not detail error conditions, permissions, or side effects, which would be beneficial for a query execution tool.

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: two short paragraphs with an example. It is front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence adds value. No redundancy.

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 presence of an output schema, the description does not need to detail return values. It provides essential context for parameters and usage. Missing are details on query limitations or error handling, but overall adequate for a tool with 3 required params and no annotations.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the role of bucket_name and scope_name as context, and clarifies that query should use collection names without prefixes. The example adds significant semantic value.

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 verb 'Run', the resource 'SQL++ query on a scope', and the output 'list of JSON objects'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'explain_sql_plus_plus_query' and other query tools.

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 explicit guidance on when to use (run a query) and includes an example with correct and incorrect usage. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives among the sibling tools.

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