execute_query

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

Description explicitly states it supports read-only commands (non-destructive), results are limited by max_rows or configuration, and returns a dictionary with status. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden; it covers key behavioral aspects well.

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?

Description is well-structured with a brief intro, supported commands list, and parameter details. Could be slightly more concise, but no extraneous information.

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?

While parameter semantics are good, the description does not explain error handling, the structure of the output dictionary beyond keys, or edge cases (e.g., what happens if max_rows is not set). Output schema is present but not detailed; description could be more complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by providing examples for query and explaining the default behavior and purpose of max_rows. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare 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?

Description clearly states the tool executes a RetrieVe/UniQuery statement and returns results, listing supported read-only commands. This is specific and distinguishes it from siblings like validate_query or execute_tcl.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies read-only use (supported commands) but does not mention when to prefer execute_query over validate_query or other query-like tools.

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