sql_editor_assistant_warm

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this operation does not mutate user data. The description adds useful behavioral context by clarifying that no model call occurs, but does not explain what warming entails, whether editor_id must reference an existing editor, or any latency/initialization side effects.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the action and followed by the key timing and no-model-call qualifiers. No words are wasted.

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 two-parameter warm-up tool with a readOnlyHint and no output schema, the description covers the essential action and timing. However, it leaves the optional profile parameter and the required editor_id semantics unexplained, which is a notable gap 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 parameter meaning, and it does not. It never mentions editor_id or profile; only the property name 'editor_id' and the resource phrase 'editor's assistant' make the required parameter minimally inferable.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: starting the SQL editor's assistant process, with the temporal qualifier 'ahead of the first question' and the behavioral note 'no model call.' It clearly distinguishes a warm-up call from an actual question call by implication, but does not explicitly name the sibling sql_editor_assistant as the alternative.

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?

Gives clear usage context: call this before the first question to warm the assistant. It does not state when not to use it or explicitly contrast it with sql_editor_assistant, but the intended timing is clear enough for correct invocation.

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