query_athena

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says queries are executed and results retrieved; it does not mention cost implications, async execution, credential/permission needs, or result-size limits. These are material behaviors for an Athena query tool.

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 with no redundant wording. It front-loads the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotation, so the description should explain return behavior and operational caveats. It only says 'retrieve results,' leaving the agent without information about response format, synchronous vs. async execution, or potential error conditions.

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?

The schema already describes all six parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter-level meaning, but it doesn't need to because the schema provides adequate documentation.

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 a specific verb ('Execute SQL queries') and resource ('Amazon Athena'), and mentions the outcome 'retrieve results.' It is unambiguous even though it doesn't distinguish from siblings, because no siblings exist.

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 implies when to use the tool: when you need to run SQL against Athena and get results. However, it doesn't provide explicit conditions, prerequisites, exclusions, or alternatives, and there are no sibling tools to contrast with.

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