query_sql

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It claims the query is 'safe' but does not clarify what 'safe' means (e.g., read-only, restricted operations, no side effects). Lacks disclosure about permissions, rate limits, or potential impacts. The term 'safe' is vague and insufficient.

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 a single sentence, direct and concise. However, it could be restructured to front-load key details about safety or usage. No wasted words, but it sacrifices depth for brevity.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description lacks essential context: what 'safe' implies, whether SELECT-only, limit behavior, or execution constraints. For a SQL query tool, this minimal description is incomplete and could lead to misuse.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain any parameters. The two parameters ('sql' and 'limit') are not described, leaving the agent to infer meaning from names alone. No additional semantics or constraints are provided.

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 'Run a safe SQL query on the Kinetica database,' specifying the action (run query) and resource (Kinetica database). It distinguishes from sibling tools that describe tables, retrieve records, insert records, list tables, or start monitors, as this is the only tool for arbitrary SQL execution.

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 siblings like get_records or describe_table. It does not mention when not to use it or provide any usage context. The description only says 'safe SQL query' without elaborating on scenarios.

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