query

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Execute a query', which essentially repeats the tool name. It does not reveal whether the query can mutate data, what the return format is, whether errors are handled, or any side effects. This is minimal and inadequate for a database execution tool.

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: 'Execute a query on the DuckDB database'. Every word earns its place, and there is no unnecessary information. It is highly concise and well-structured.

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 tool has one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations. The description does not explain return values, query execution semantics, whether DDL/DML is allowed, or how it differs from related tools. Given the minimal context, the description leaves significant gaps for an agent attempting to use this tool correctly.

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?

The input schema contains one parameter with full 100% description coverage: 'SQL query to execute'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The schema already clearly documents the parameter's purpose.

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 states a specific action: 'Execute a query on the DuckDB database'. It clearly identifies the resource (DuckDB) and the operation (execute a query). However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'inspect_query', which also involves queries, so it misses the differentiation needed for a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as inspect_query or the table creation tools. The description gives no context about appropriate use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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