run_query

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

Without annotations, the description provides some behavioral context by stating 'checked for safety' and 'read-only SELECT by default,' but does not disclose what happens with non-SELECT queries or error handling, leaving gaps.

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, but the second sentence is very short and could be integrated. No wasted words, but not perfectly structured.

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 no output schema, the description omits return value details. It also lacks execution limits or error behavior. For a simple tool with one parameter, it is moderately complete but leaves questions.

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 single parameter 'sql' has a description in the schema ('The SQL query string to run.') and the tool description adds no extra semantics. Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it executes SQL queries against the database, emphasizes safety checks, and specifies read-only SELECT as default. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_tables or describe_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 usage for read-only queries but does not explicitly state when to use alternatives like list_tables or describe_table. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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