execute_sql_query

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds 'synchronous' and 'return JSON results,' which are useful, but it does not explain potential implications like performance, error behavior, or that the query must be read-only. It does not contradict annotations, so this is a moderate score.

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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's action and output. It is well-structured and front-loaded, with no wasted words.

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?

While an output schema exists (so return values are covered), the description lacks essential context for a powerful SQL execution tool. It does not mention the read-only constraint, any limitations, or how it relates to the higher-level analysis tools. Given the potential impact, this is incomplete for an agent to use safely and effectively.

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?

The schema has one parameter 'sql' with 0% schema description coverage. The description merely refers to 'SQL query,' which essentially restates the parameter name and provides no additional meaning such as SQL dialect, allowed statements, or syntax examples. It fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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's function: 'Execute one synchronous SQL query and return JSON results.' It identifies a specific verb (execute) and resource (SQL query), and the SQL nature implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling analysis tools. However, it does not explicitly draw that differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling query_* analysis tools. It does not mention alternatives, prerequisites, or contexts where this tool is appropriate or inappropriate. The description is purely functional without usage direction.

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