claude-database-tools

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states basic functionality. It doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits like authentication needs, error handling, transaction behavior, or rate limits, which are essential for a database execution tool. No contradiction exists, but the disclosure is minimal.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and key features. It avoids unnecessary words, though it could be slightly more structured by separating usage notes from functionality.

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 complexity of executing stored procedures (with potential side effects, security implications, and varied outputs) and no annotations or output schema, the description is inadequate. It lacks details on return formats, error cases, or operational constraints, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent.

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 both parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'optional parameters' and 'input parameters', but doesn't provide additional syntax or format details beyond what the schema specifies, such as parameter types or constraints.

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 action ('Executes') and resource ('a stored procedure'), specifying it handles parameters and returns results. It distinguishes from siblings like create_table or read_data by focusing on procedure execution rather than table operations, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with them.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like read_data or insert_data, nor does it mention prerequisites such as needing an existing stored procedure. The description implies usage for executing procedures but lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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