⚠️ SCHEMA CHANGE: Execute DDL (CREATE, ALTER, DROP). Modifies database structure. May lock tables.

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

The description mentions that the tool modifies database structure and may lock tables, which warns of potential side effects. However, it does not disclose reversibility, permission requirements, or auto-commit behavior, leaving significant gaps.

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 (one sentence) but it is a direct copy of the title. Every word is present in the title already, so the description does not earn its place by adding value.

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's complexity (3 parameters, no output schema, subtle sibling distinctions), the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to clarify the query parameter, how to use params and database_name, or how it differs from other schema-altering tools.

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%, yet the description does not explain any of the three parameters (query, params, database_name). The agent receives no guidance on how to use these parameters, despite the tool's complexity.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool versus siblings like create_table, drop_table, or execute_write_query, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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