okf_sql_tool

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'Read-only', which clearly signals no mutation, and 'in-memory' adds useful context about data scope and volatility. It does not mention permissions or limitations, but the core safety-relevant behavior is transparent.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's core nature and scope.

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?

For a simple read-only query tool with an output schema, the description covers core function and safety. However, it omits how the optional 'bundle' parameter affects queries and gives no indication of SQL dialect or usage constraints, leaving some practical gaps for an agent invoking it 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters, but it does not explain 'query' or 'bundle' in any detail. The phrase 'SELECT' implies query is a SQL string, yet 'bundle' remains entirely unexplained, leaving a meaningful semantic gap.

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 states a specific verb ('Read-only SELECT'), resource ('in-memory catalog'), and scope ('concepts, links'), making it clear what the tool does. It does not explicitly name sibling tools for differentiation, but the SQL-focused wording distinguishes it from nearby semantic-search and context 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?

The read-only SELECT framing implies this tool is for querying catalog data with SQL, which gives useful context. However, it does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over alternatives like okf_search_tool or okf_related_tool, nor does it provide exclusions or comparison to siblings.

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