읽기 전용 쿼리

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds that multiple statements, writes, and EXEC are rejected, reinforcing the read-only nature. It also clarifies the parameter binding limitation, which is useful context beyond the annotation.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the main action ('Run a single SELECT statement'), and then provides restrictions. Every sentence contributes information with no filler.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, constraints, and parameter binding, which is sufficient for a read-only query tool. It doesn't describe the return format, but the lack of an output schema makes this less critical. The schema and annotations cover safety and parameter details.

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 covers 100% of parameters, but the description adds valuable semantics by explaining the @name syntax and that params can only bind values, not table or column names. This complements 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 'SELECT 문 하나를 실행합니다' (executes a single SELECT statement), specifying the verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like list_tables and describe_table, which focus on metadata.

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 explicit constraints: multiple statements, writes, and EXEC are rejected, and parameters can only bind values, not identifiers. This gives clear guidance on when to use the tool, though it doesn't explicitly mention alternative tools for non-query scenarios.

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