sql_call_rpc

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. It merely says 'Call a stored procedure/function' with no information about side effects, return format, error behavior, permissions, or whether the operation is read-only vs mutating. This is a serious omission for an RPC tool.

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 concise sentence that efficiently communicates the primary purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no wasted words, though it sacrifices depth for brevity.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and a complex domain (stored procedures), the description is severely underspecified. It fails to explain how params map to the procedure, what the return value is, or how it relates to sibling tools like sql_execute. This is inadequate for an AI agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The input schema provides descriptions for both parameters ('Name of the function to call' and 'Parameters for the function'), achieving 100% schema coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('call') and the resource ('stored procedure/function'), providing a specific purpose. While it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like sql_execute by targeting RPC calls, it does not explicitly mention this distinction or alternatives.

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 the use case—calling a stored procedure or function—but offers no explicit guidance on when to use it versus other SQL tools like sql_execute or db_select. There is no mention of exclusions or alternative tools, leaving the usage context only implied.

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