Get details about an Amazon Athena query execution by providing its execution ID. Check status, output location, and other execution metadata to monitor and troubleshoot queries.
Get details about a query execution
Args: query_execution_id: Query execution ID
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query_execution_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only implies a read operation and does not disclose error conditions, required execution state, or whether result rows are excluded. The output schema covers return shape, not these behavioral aspects.
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 front-loaded, with the main action in the first sentence and a short Args section afterward. No unnecessary detail is included, even though the Args line is somewhat redundant with the schema.
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 output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but the description still lacks routing context among the many siblings. In particular, it does not clarify how get_query_execution differs from get_query_results or list_query_executions, so an agent could select the wrong tool.
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 Args line says query_execution_id is a query execution ID, which largely restates the schema property title 'Query Execution Id.' With 0% schema description coverage, the description needed to provide more useful context, such as where the ID comes from or how to obtain it, but it does not.
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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Get details about a query execution.' It is not a tautology and identifies the operation. However, 'details' is broad and the description does not distinguish this from get_query_results or list_query_executions.
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 is given for when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not name sibling tools or state exclusions, leaving an agent to infer the right choice from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.