test_query_database

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and a parameter hint, but does not mention read/write nature, pagination, or any other behavioral traits. The existence of an output schema is not referenced.

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?

The description is extremely short (one sentence), which is concise but under-specified for a 5-parameter tool. It is front-loaded with the purpose, but lacks necessary detail to be fully useful.

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 tool's complexity (5 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations), the description is far from complete. It does not explain return values (despite output schema existing), pagination, or any other context needed for correct invocation.

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 only addresses one parameter (data_source_id) by noting its usage, ignoring filter_json, sorts_json, start_cursor, and page_size entirely. This adds minimal value beyond the schema structure.

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 'Query database contents', a specific verb and resource. It also hints at the correct parameter to use, distinguishing from a potential misuse of 'database_id'. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like default_query_database or test_query_data_source.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. With many sibling tools (e.g., default_query_database, test_query_data_source), an agent would lack context for selection. The only usage hint is about the parameter name, not tool choice.

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