Run a read-only SQL query

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

No annotations are provided, but the description explicitly discloses that the tool is read-only, accepts a single statement, and returns JSON. This covers the key safety trait and output behavior, but it does not discuss error handling or result size limits.

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, with two sentences that front-load the core purpose and then provide the prerequisite schema-reading instruction. There is no redundant filler.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core function, read-only safety, return format, and schema learning prerequisite. It lacks details on pagination or error behavior, but these are not critical for basic usage.

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 input schema already provides a full description for the sql parameter ('a single read-only SELECT/WITH statement'). The tool description repeats the same information without adding additional semantic detail, so it meets the baseline but does not go beyond.

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 runs a single read-only SQL SELECT/WITH statement and returns rows as JSON. This identifies the specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from the sibling tool list_tables.

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?

It provides a clear usage prerequisite: read the schema://tables and schema://table/{name} resources first. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or directly reference list_tables as an alternative for listing tables.

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