db_run_named_query

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

The description lacks crucial behavioral details: 'Read-only by default' is ambiguous (suggests possible write capability), and 'bridge plane' is unexplained jargon. No information about permissions, error cases, or output format (though output schema exists).

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?

Extremely short but at the cost of omitting essential information. The description is under-specified, leaving key details about parameters and usage unstated.

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?

Given the presence of a sibling tool set and 3 parameters with no schema descriptions, the description fails to provide a complete picture. It does not explain what a Named Query is, how parameters are used, or the significance of 'bridge plane'.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description adds no meaning to the three parameters (project, parameters, query_path). It merely mentions 'project Named Query' without explaining any parameter.

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 clearly states the action 'Runs a project Named Query' and specifies the resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar tools like db_query, which might also run queries.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like db_query, history_query, or other query tools. The phrase 'Read-only by default' hints at safety but does not provide explicit usage context.

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