mysql_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Execute a MySQL query' implies a write operation could occur, but it doesn't specify whether this tool is read-only, destructive, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what happens on errors. For a database tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence ('Execute a MySQL query'), which is front-loaded and wastes no words. It efficiently conveys the core action, though this brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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 complexity of a database query tool with no annotations, no output schema, and multiple siblings, the description is incomplete. It lacks context on behavior, return values, error handling, and integration with other tools (e.g., mysql_connect). This makes it inadequate for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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%, with clear descriptions for both parameters ('query' and 'params'), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as query syntax examples or param usage details. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema coverage is high.

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 a MySQL query' clearly states the verb ('Execute') and resource ('MySQL query'), making the basic purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from potential alternatives or specify what type of queries it handles (e.g., SELECT, INSERT, DDL). Compared to siblings like mysql_list_tables or mysql_describe_table, the distinction is implied but not explicit.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., requiring a connection via mysql_connect), appropriate query types, or when to choose other tools like mysql_list_databases for specific tasks. Usage is implied but not stated, leaving gaps for an AI agent.

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