answerSqlSyntax

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

The description confirms the non-destructive nature (consistent with readOnlyHint annotation) but adds minimal behavioral detail beyond that. It does not discuss response format, constraints, or potential side effects, relying heavily on the annotation for safety disclosure.

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 compact and well-structured: a single introductory sentence followed by a clear bulleted decision tree. Every sentence contributes value, and there is no redundant or extraneous 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?

While the description explains how to get the database_id, it does not describe what the answer looks like (e.g., format, length, examples) or mention limitations. Given the lack of an output schema and the tool's Q&A nature, additional completeness would be beneficial.

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 covers all three parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), but the descriptions are terse. The tool description adds context that the question should be about syntax for the given database engine, which enhances meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not detail parameter formats or expected values significantly.

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's purpose: answering syntax-related questions for a specific database engine based on a database ID. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like fixSql or generateSql, which handle different tasks.

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 provides explicit steps for obtaining the required database_id via getDatabase or searchDatabase, including decision criteria. While it doesn't contrast against sibling tools for when to use this tool itself, the guidance for prerequisites is clear and actionable.

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