query_sql

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

Description is consistent with annotations (readOnlyHint true). It adds context that the tool executes SQL and returns results. No contradiction; disclosure is adequate for a read-only operation with annotation support.

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?

Description is short and front-loaded with purpose. The Args/Returns format is clear, though the return description is minimal. No wasted words.

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 output schema exists and sibling tools cover similar SQL operations, the description is adequate but lacks details on query limitations, result format, or error handling. It could be more comprehensive for a tool executing arbitrary SQL.

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%, but the description provides docstring-style parameter meanings (dbinstance_id, region_id, db_name, sql). This adds essential meaning beyond the bare schema property titles.

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?

Description clearly states the tool executes read-only SQL like SHOW and SELECT. It conveys the verb 'execute' and resource 'SQL', distinguishing from sibling tools like explain_sql or show_create_table.

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?

Description implies read-only usage ('read-only sql likes show xxx, select xxx'), but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives or provide exclusions. Additional guidance on safe vs. unsafe SQL would improve clarity.

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