query_database

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It fails to indicate whether the tool is read-only, whether it modifies data, what permissions are needed, or any side effects. The agent cannot determine safety or appropriateness from the description alone.

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 extremely short (one sentence), but this brevity comes at the cost of completeness. It is under-specified rather than concise. Every sentence should earn its place; here, it leaves critical gaps.

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?

Despite having an output schema (not shown), the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, error handling, connection requirements, or the role of 'params'. For a tool with 3 parameters and zero annotations, much more context is needed to be minimally viable.

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 0%, meaning the schema provides no parameter descriptions. The description adds no value: it does not explain the purpose of 'query', 'params', or 'connection_name', nor how to structure the 'params' object. The agent is left guessing parameter semantics.

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 'Run a parameterized query on a named database connection' clearly states the verb and resource, but it does not differentiate itself from the sibling tool 'execute_sql', which likely performs a similar function. The term 'parameterized query' hints at safety but is not explicit enough to distinguish usage.

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 siblings like 'get_schema' or 'execute_sql'. There is no mention of prerequisites, when-not-to-use, or alternatives. The agent must rely on the tool name alone to infer context.

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