执行 DM8 只读 SQL

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core behavioral trait (read-only, allowed statement types) but lacks details on error handling for non-allowed statements, authentication requirements, rate limits, or return format. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the key restriction. Every word serves a purpose, with no wasted information.

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?

For a simple read-only query execution tool with no output schema, the description provides enough information to understand its purpose and restrictions. However, it could be slightly improved by noting what happens if an invalid statement is submitted, but given the simplicity, it is largely complete.

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 100% with both parameters described. The description adds meaningful value by specifying the allowed statement types for the query parameter, going beyond the schema's '只读 SQL 语句'. This helps the agent construct valid queries.

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 tool executes read-only SQL queries and lists exactly which statement types are allowed (SELECT/SHOW/DESCRIBE/EXPLAIN). This distinguishes it from sibling tools dm8_describe_table and dm8_list_tables, which are more specific table operations.

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 clear context that only certain statement types are allowed, implicitly indicating when to use this tool (for custom read-only queries) and when not to (for modifications). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion cases beyond the allowed types.

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