github_code_scanning_get_codeql_database

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether authentication is required, what side effects occur, or whether it downloads data or returns metadata. The sole sentence offers minimal transparency.

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, which is concise. However, it could be slightly more structured to include key details. It is not overly verbose, so it scores well on conciseness.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., database file, URL, or metadata). Given the lack of annotations and schema, the description is incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, but the descriptions are merely the parameter names ('owner', 'repo', 'language'). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but provides no extra 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 states 'Get a CodeQL database for a repository', which clearly indicates a retrieval operation. However, it does not specify what 'get' returns (e.g., database content or metadata), nor does it differentiate from the sibling 'list_codeql_databases' tool.

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 listing databases or deleting them. The description lacks context about prerequisites or when retrieval is appropriate.

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