query_warehouse

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the operation is read-only, that multiple statements are rejected, and points to describe_warehouse for known gotchas. This covers key safety and constraint traits, though it does not mention return format or error handling.

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 consists of two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and key constraint, followed by a useful cross-reference. There is no filler or redundant phrasing.

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?

For a simple query tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, safety, and points to describe_warehouse for schema/gotchas. It omits return format details, but these are not critical for a query tool and the cross-reference fills most gaps.

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%, so the description partially compensates by specifying that the SQL parameter must be a read-only SELECT. It does not explain max_rows, but the parameter name and default value make its purpose self-evident. Overall, it adds some meaning beyond the bare schema but not comprehensive parameter 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 states a specific action: 'Run a read-only SELECT against the NFL warehouse (DuckDB).' This clearly identifies the tool's purpose and distinguishes it from sibling tools by specifying the database and query type. It is not a tautology and provides a concrete resource.

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 this tool (to query the warehouse) and explicitly directs users to describe_warehouse for tables and gotchas, which serves as a complementary tool. It does not explicitly list exclusions beyond rejecting multiple statements, but the usage context is clear.

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