transaction_query

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, but the description adds that execution is transactional and provides a per-statement risk preview. This goes beyond annotations to disclose key behavioral traits (atomicity, preview mode).

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?

Two concise, front-loaded sentences with no redundancy. Every sentence adds essential information.

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 description covers purpose, preview behavior, and transactional aspect. However, it omits details about error handling, rollback, output format, and limits. Given no output schema, more context on return behavior would improve completeness.

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% with good descriptions, but the description adds value by explaining the confirmed parameter's role (preview vs execute) and the transactional nature of sql. This enhances agent understanding beyond the raw schema.

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 executes multiple statements in one transaction, distinguishing it from siblings like read_query or write_query. The verb 'execute' and resource 'multiple statements in one transaction' are specific and unambiguous.

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 mentions the confirmed parameter requirement (must be true to execute) and preview behavior when omitted/false, providing usage context. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like write_query or explain_query.

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