execute_query_internal_table

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

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read/write nature, idempotency, permission requirements, rate limits, or side effects. It simply restates the purpose.

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?

While the description is short, it is under-informative. Conciseness should not come at the expense of clarity and completeness. The single sentence omits critical details, making it insufficiently helpful.

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 2 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should explain return values, error handling, or usage constraints. It provides none of this, leaving the agent underinformed.

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%. The description adds no meaning beyond the parameter names. It does not explain what 'database' refers to or the expected format of the 'query' string. For a tool with zero coverage, the description must compensate, but it fails to do so.

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', the query language 'kql', and the target 'internal table or materialized view'. This distinguishes it from sibling 'execute_query_external_table' which targets external tables.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'execute_query_internal_table' vs 'execute_query_external_table'. Does not mention any prerequisites or context for choosing this tool.

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