get_select_list

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the return structure (dictionary with query, IDs, count, truncation flag) and implies a read-only operation (SELECT), but does not explicitly confirm safety or mention edge cases like large result handling.

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 front-loaded with the purpose and structured into two paragraphs. It is concise but could integrate the Args section more elegantly into the main text to reduce redundancy.

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 output schema exists (confirmed in context signals), the description adequately explains the return dictionary. With only two parameters and clear documentation, it is mostly complete, though it lacks explicit differentiation from siblings like 'execute_query' or 'read_records'.

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 compensates well by specifying that 'query' expects a SELECT/SSELECT statement with an example and that 'max_ids' is optional with a default of U2_MAX_RECORDS. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema types.

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 a SELECT statement and returns record IDs, distinguishing it from tools that return full record data. However, it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, making it slightly less than excellent.

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 further processing ('useful for getting a list of matching records for further processing'), but lacks explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives or any exclusions.

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