execute_sql

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. While it mentions executing raw SQL, it does not disclose potential destructive side effects (e.g., DROP TABLE), required permissions, or whether the action is reversible. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the action itself.

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?

Two concise sentences with no fluff: first sentence states purpose, second provides usage guidance. Front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., result set, affected rows, or status). For a raw SQL execution tool, this is a significant gap that leaves the agent uncertain about the response format or side effects.

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 already provides 100% coverage with a description for the single 'sql' parameter ('SQL query to execute'). The tool description does not add any extra meaning or usage hints beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score 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 'Execute raw SQL query on Supabase database', which is a specific verb+resource pair. It also differentiates from sibling supabase_cli_execute by noting a self-hosted alternative, ensuring the agent can distinguish between similar tools.

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?

Explicitly states when not to use this tool: 'For self-hosted Supabase, use supabase_cli_execute with "db execute" for better reliability.' This provides clear guidance on when to choose an alternative, fulfilling the guidelines dimension fully.

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