execute_query

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure. It reveals the read-only mode, the crucial SAP B1 mixed-case column naming rule with a double quote example, and the exact response shape including 'columns', 'rows', 'rowCount', and 'truncated' semantics.

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 well-structured, starting with purpose, then constraints, a critical usage warning, and finally the response contract. Each sentence earns its place without redundancy, making it easy to consume despite the rich content.

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 simple schema, no output schema, and two intuitive parameters, this description is self-contained. It defines what the tool does, the read-only constraints, the important casing/quote behavior, and what the result contains, leaving nothing essential unspecified.

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 already 100%, so the schema documents both sql and limit. The description adds extra parameter-related guidance through the SQL quoting warning and example, which helps the agent construct valid queries beyond the schema's basic description.

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 begins with 'Ejecuta una consulta SQL contra SAP B1 HANA y devuelve las filas en JSON', naming a specific verb, target system, and return format. This clearly differentiates the tool from metadata-only siblings like list_tables and get_table_schema.

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 explicitly states the default read-only mode and the restricted allowed SQL statements ('SELECT/WITH/EXPLAIN'), giving an obvious usage boundary. It does not explicitly name sibling tools or when-not-to-use cases, but the read-only restriction is a clear contextual guideline.

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