read_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It states the tool executes a SELECT query but does not disclose key behaviors such as whether the query is sandboxed, what happens on error, performance limitations, or if the database state is modified in any way (e.g., side effects like triggers). The description is too brief to be transparent.

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 with no wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded with the action. However, for a tool with zero annotations, this may be too brief to be adequately informative.

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 tool has one parameter, no annotations, no output schema, and no description of results or error handling, the description lacks completeness. It does not cover what the tool returns, how to handle errors, or any constraints on the query (e.g., only one query allowed). The sibling tools suggest write operations exist, but the description does not address potential misuse.

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 coverage is 100% as the one required parameter 'query' has a schema description 'SELECT SQL query to execute'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Execute' and the resource 'SELECT query on the SQLite database'. It distinguishes from siblings like write_query and create_table by specifying SELECT queries only. However, it does not explicitly contrast with these siblings.

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?

The description implies this tool is for read-only SELECT queries, but no explicit guidance is given on when to use this versus write_query or other tools. The agent must infer usage from the tool name and sibling context.

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