sql_editor_state

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. Beyond that the description adds the default-to-active-tab behavior and enumerates the payload (draft, recent files, history size), which is useful and not in the annotations, but it says nothing about size limits, permissions, or how the state is scoped.

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?

One compact sentence with the resource front-loaded and the default scope in parentheses. The trailing 'for restoring it' is slightly tacked-on but adds the purpose, so waste is minimal.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of describing the return payload, and it does name the three components (draft, recent files, history size). But against a 0%-coverage parameter and no output schema, the tab_id semantics and any structure of the returned state remain under-specified.

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 coverage is 0% and the single tab_id parameter is an undocumented nullable string. The description compensates partially by explaining the default ('the active tab's by default'), but it never says how to obtain a tab_id or what format it takes.

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 names the specific resource returned — one SQL Editor tab's saved draft, recent files, and history size — which lets an agent distinguish it from siblings like sql_editor_tabs and sql_editor_history. However, it uses a noun phrase with no explicit retrieval verb ('get/read'), leaving the action slightly implicit.

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?

'for restoring it' implies the use case (state persistence/restore), and '(the active tab's by default)' hints at default scoping. But it never states when to choose this over overlapping siblings such as sql_editor_tabs, sql_editor_history, or sql_editor_files, so the guidance is only implied.

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