query_user_custom

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, indicating a safe read operation. The description aligns by calling it a query and specifying the database. No contradictions, and the description adds the 'advanced' caveat, but does not disclose potential risks like SQL injection or table existence constraints.

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 a single sentence that conveys essential purpose and usage context without any wasted words. It is front-loaded and 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?

For a read-only query tool with annotations covering safety, the description is fairly complete. It identifies the database and the advanced nature. No output schema exists, but the tool's purpose is sufficiently clarified for an agent to decide when to invoke it.

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 100%: both parameters (table, where_clause) are described. The description adds 'complex SQL WHERE clause' but does not provide new semantic information about the parameters themselves beyond the schema.

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 'Execute complex SQL WHERE clause on user_directives.db (advanced, rare use)' clearly states the action (execute), resource (SQL WHERE clause on a specific database), and usage context (advanced, rare). It distinguishes from simpler tools like get_from_user_custom_where.

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 phrase 'advanced, rare use' implies that this tool should be used when simpler query tools are insufficient, but it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives. The guidance is present but could be more explicit.

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