update_query

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

The description discloses that the tool commits automatically and returns the number of rows updated, adding context beyond the annotations. The destructiveHint annotation already signals destructive behavior, and the description reinforces this while providing useful operational details.

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?

Three short sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the primary purpose, the second gives a key constraint, and the third explains the return value. Well-structured and front-loaded.

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 tool has a simple scope, full schema coverage, an output schema, and annotations, the description covers the essential behavioral aspects. It mentions return value, auto-commit, and connection prerequisite, making it sufficiently complete for an agent to use 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 schema descriptions already cover all three parameters (query, params, connection) at 100% coverage. The description does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema, only repeating the requirement for a writable connection already present in the connection parameter description.

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 opens with 'Execute an UPDATE statement,' which clearly specifies the verb and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like insert_query and delete_query by explicitly focusing on UPDATE operations.

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?

It provides clear context by stating 'Only available on writable connections (readonly=false in list_schemas),' guiding when the tool can be used. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the constraint plus the tool name makes the usage situation clear.

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