ssh_db_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses return format (raw command output as text) and database-specific restrictions, but lacks details on error handling, authentication requirements, or potential timeouts.

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 compact (three sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by constraints and specifics. No unnecessary words.

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 9 parameters (4 required) and no output schema, the description covers the main functionality and constraints adequately. It could be enhanced with more details on error states or output format, but it is sufficient for a query tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the query parameter's behavior (SELECT only for SQL, find for Mongo) and the collection parameter's necessity for MongoDB, going beyond the schema descriptions.

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 the tool runs a read-only query against a remote database, specifying constraints for MySQL/PostgreSQL (SELECT only) and MongoDB (find() with collection). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ssh_db_dump or ssh_db_import.

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 context for when to use (read-only queries) and what limitations apply (rejected keywords, MongoDB collection requirement). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternative tools among siblings.

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