garmin_query

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden and does well: it states that the database is opened in SQLite read-only mode at the engine level, so writes, ATTACH, and schema changes are impossible regardless of SQL content. It also states the result row cap and default. It does not cover error behavior or auth requirements, but the key safety constraints are clearly 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 three short sentences, front-loads the core purpose, and then adds only the safety and row-cap details needed to use the tool correctly. There is no wasted text.

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 output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required, and the read-only behavior is well covered. However, for a generic SQL query tool with no annotations and 0% parameter schema coverage, the description should probably point to the schema or table/column reference, especially given the many topic-specific sibling tools.

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 0% for two parameters. The description adds meaning for 'limit' by saying results are capped at *limit* rows with a default of 1000, but it provides no detail about the required 'sql' parameter beyond calling it a SELECT query. With 0% schema coverage, more compensation was needed for the main parameter.

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 specific verb and resource: run a SELECT query against the Garmin database. It also scopes the operation as read-only, but it does not explicitly differentiate this generic query tool from the many metric-specific sibling 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?

The description does not say when to use this tool versus the many specific Garmin tools such as garmin_activities or garmin_sleep. It implies ad-hoc querying by saying 'Run a read-only SELECT query,' but gives no explicit guidance or alternatives.

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