db_run_readonly

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses two important behaviors: write operations are blocked, and TOP is automatically injected if no row limit is present. These are critical side effects that the agent would not otherwise know.

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 three sentences with each adding value: the core action, behavioral constraint, and usage guidance. It is front-loaded and free of waste.

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?

The description covers the essential facets for a generic query tool: functionality, constraints, side effects, and schema discovery fallback. Given there is no output schema, the absence of a return-value description is a minor gap, but the provided details are sufficiently complete for reliable 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?

The schema already describes the query parameter (100% coverage). The description adds meaning by constraining the accepted query to read-only SELECTs and explaining the automatic TOP injection, which affects how the query parameter is interpreted and executed.

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 states a clear verb+resource: 'Executes a SELECT query on SQL Server.' It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly limiting to read-only SELECT commands, making it unique among schema exploration and test tools.

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?

It gives explicit advice to use db_describe_schema and db_describe_table first when unsure about names, and clarifies that write operations are blocked. It does not compare directly to db_sample_data, but the read-only SELECT context implies when to use this tool over others.

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