get_rows

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden and does so well. It discloses read-only nature, sensitive column masking, a row cap (MCP_MAX_ROWS), and supported filter/pagination behaviors, which are critical behavioral traits not apparent from the schema alone.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action. Each sentence provides distinct value (purpose, requirements/capabilities, safety/limits) with no redundancy.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers essential usage constraints and safety behaviors. It does not explain the return payload structure or fully clarify the 'columnAllowlist' parameter, but it gives an agent enough context to select and invoke the tool 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It adds meaning to columns (explicit list required), filters (equality/IN/range), and pagination (limit/offset). However, the 'columnAllowlist' parameter is not mentioned, and 'schema' is only implied via 'MySQL table', leaving gaps.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Read rows') and resource ('single allowlisted MySQL table'), clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like describe_table and list_tables. The scope and action are unambiguous.

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?

Description provides clear context for when to use (reading row data) and specifies prerequisites ('Requires an explicit column list') and capabilities (filter types, pagination). However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions relative to sibling tools, so it stops short of a 5.

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