sql_editor_open_file

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

The readOnlyHint=true annotation already establishes this is a safe read, and the description confirms the read behavior plus scopes it to the SQL Editor's folder. It does not disclose error behavior for a missing/non-.sql file, whether the file loads into an editor session, or any return format.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized, though it leaves no room for the routing or parameter detail an agent would benefit from.

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 one-parameter read tool with annotations covering safety, the description is minimally adequate. It omits fileName format expectations and what happens on failure, and there is no output schema to explain what reading returns.

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?

With only one parameter and 0% schema description coverage, the description carries the burden, and it does add meaning: the 'name' argument is the filename of a .sql file located in the SQL Editor's folder. It does not clarify whether the extension must be included or how paths are handled.

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 (read) and resource (one .sql file) with a location qualifier (the SQL Editor's folder). An agent understands the operation, but the description does not differentiate this from siblings like sql_editor_files or sql_editor_save_file.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternative tools are named. The agent must infer from the name alone that this opens a single file rather than listing files (sql_editor_files) or saving one (sql_editor_save_file).

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