execute_select

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It states that queries execute inside a server-enforced read-only transactionccurately characterizes the tool's safety and constraint behavior. This goes well beyond a minimal description.

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 one dense, front-loaded sentence that packs purpose, constraints, and transaction behavior without redundancy. Every clause adds value and there is 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?

Given the lack of an output schema, the description is complete on safety and allowed usage, and max_rows implies row results. A slight gap is the absence of any explicit description of the return shape or error behavior, but this is minor for a tool whose main risk is safely constraining SQL execution.

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 covers all three parameters with 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the single-statement SELECT/WITH restriction but adds no new parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already documents.

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 executes read-only SELECT queries and is the 'only allowed SQL entry,' which strongly identifies its purpose. It also differentiates itself from sibling metadata/connection tools such as describe_table and list_tables.

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 gives explicit usage context: it is the only SQL entry point and only accepts single SELECT/WITH statements. It lists forbidden operations (DML/DDL, SELECT INTO, row locks, multi-statements, dangerous functions). It does not directly name sibling alternatives, but the constraints make the intended usage clear.

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