execute_sql_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It explicitly states that only SELECT queries are allowed, implying read-only behavior, and advises secure parameter usage. It does not disclose error handling or performance implications, but the restriction to SELECT is a critical behavior disclosed.

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 with sections for prerequisites, workflow, security, args, and returns. It is slightly verbose but front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value, though some wording could be tightened.

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 complexity of SQL execution, no annotations, and low schema coverage, the description covers prerequisites, workflow, security, and all parameters. It misses interaction with other tools (e.g., how results relate to other Grist operations) but is sufficient for basic usage.

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 0%, yet the description explains each parameter in the Args section: doc_id (document ID), sql_query (SELECT only), parameters (for placeholders), timeout_ms (default 1000ms). This adds significant meaning beyond the minimal schema, providing type, default, and usage context.

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 specifies the tool executes custom SQL queries on Grist documents, explicitly limits to SELECT statements, and distinguishes from siblings like filter_sql_query by its support for complex queries with joins and aggregations. The verb+resource+scope is precise and unambiguous.

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 prerequisites (list_tables, list_columns), a typical workflow with three steps, and security guidance on using parameterized queries. It implicitly suggests usage for complex queries but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like filter_sql_query for simpler needs.

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