sql_editor_tab_new

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is partially covered. The description usefully adds that the new tab becomes active and where it is positioned, but omits whether the tab is persisted, whether it is empty vs. inheriting context, and any side effects beyond activation.

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 sentence with the placement rule front-loaded and activation stated last. No wasted words, every clause earns its place.

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 single-optional-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers placement and activation adequately. Minor gaps remain on tab persistence and interaction with draft/file state, but nothing essential for a correct call is missing.

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%, so the description must carry parameter meaning; it does explain the `after` parameter's semantics clearly (insert after that tab, else append at the end, with null default). It could be strengthened by naming the accepted identifier format, but it compensates well for the coverage 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?

States a specific verb ('Open'), resource ('new, empty SQL Editor tab'), and the resulting state ('make it active'). This distinguishes it from siblings like sql_editor_tab_activate and sql_editor_tab_close without ambiguity.

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 default placement behavior ('right after the tab `after` (else at the end)') gives implied usage context, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus sql_editor_tab_activate, sql_editor, or sql_editor_open_file.

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