query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that results are returned as text and advises LIMIT usage, but it does not disclose that arbitrary SQL may modify data, that the tool is potentially destructive, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a general SQL 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 two short sentences with no filler. The primary action and database target are front-loaded, and the LIMIT guidance earns its place as a practical safety tip.

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 schema fully documents the parameters and the description covers the return type and exploration advice. However, the lack of any statement about read-only vs. write capabilities leaves the tool incomplete given the potentially destructive nature of arbitrary SQL execution.

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 has 100% description coverage for all three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond mentioning that results are returned as text, which is already implied by the schema's format parameter.

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 executes SQL queries against a PostgreSQL database and returns results as text. It is distinguishable from the schema-inspection siblings (list_tables, describe_table), though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from 'explain' or note whether writes are allowed.

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 gives one concrete usage tip: 'Use LIMIT clauses on exploratory queries.' However, it does not state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like explain or schema_search, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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