query_sql

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint: true, and the description repeats 'read-only' without adding additional behavioral details such as error handling, timeout, or result size limits. The description adds minimal value beyond annotations.

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 concise with two sentences and a parameter list. It front-loads the purpose, and every part contributes meaning. Slightly under-specified for completeness but efficient.

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 4 required parameters and an output schema (not detailed), the description covers core semantics but lacks detail on the output format ('the sql result' is vague). For basic usage it is adequate, but could be more complete.

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description includes an Args section with brief explanations for each parameter (e.g., 'dbinstance_id: The ID of the RDS instance'), adding meaning beyond the schema titles. However, descriptions are minimal and could be more informative.

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 explicitly states 'execute read-only sql likes show xxx, select xxx', clearly indicating the tool is for read-only SQL queries. It specifies SQL command types and distinguishes 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?

The description implies use for read-only queries but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'explain_sql' or modifications. No exclusions or when-not-to-use are mentioned.

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