Test a SQL query against a selected SmartScout Amazon marketplace dataset, defaulting to five rows, to verify data access and results before use.
Test a simple query against a specific dataset
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | No | SQL query to test (optional, defaults to SELECT * LIMIT 5) | |
| datasetName | Yes | Dataset name (e.g., products, brands, sellers) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not disclose whether the query actually executes against live data, whether it can modify anything, what output shape to expect, or any rate limits — all important for a query-execution 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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no waste. It is efficient, though arguably too terse for a tool that needs disambiguation from siblings.
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 tool is simple (2 params, no output schema), but the description omits the critical distinction from smartscout_custom_query and the sandbox/execution semantics of 'test'. An agent lacks what it needs to select this tool confidently over its near-duplicate siblings.
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 100% and both parameters are documented in the schema (including the default 'SELECT * LIMIT 5' for query). The description adds nothing beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a clear verb+resource: it tests a SQL query against one named dataset. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling smartscout_custom_query or smartscout_raw_api_test, so an agent cannot tell why it would pick 'test_query' over those without inspecting the schemas.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus smartscout_custom_query, smartscout_raw_api_test, or smartscout_dataset_status. The word 'test' implies a trial/sandbox mode but the description never says so or states any precondition.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.