query_db

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does usefully disclose that execution is read-only and SELECT-based against the sample database, but it omits permissions, row limits, timeout behavior, and error handling for unsafe SQL.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every phrase, especially read-only, SELECT, and sample database, contributes directly to selection and invocation.

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?

The output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values. For a simple one-parameter query tool, the core operation is covered, but the description leaves gaps around how to discover the schema, what SQL dialect is accepted, and how the read-only restriction is enforced.

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% for the single required sql parameter, so the description must add meaning. It does indicate that the input should be a SELECT query, which constrains the parameter beyond the bare schema type, but it gives no syntax, dialect, example, or length/limit guidance.

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 a specific verb and resource: run a read-only SELECT query against the sample database. It is distinguishable from file tools and write tools, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling run_python or describe_schema, which could also be used to inspect data indirectly.

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 read-only SELECT phrasing implies the tool is for querying rather than mutating or exploring files. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to use this instead of describe_schema, run_python, or other siblings, nor does it state prerequisites or exclusions.

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