query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It only discloses the read-only nature but fails to mention execution behavior, error handling, limits, or whether it supports multiple statements. This is insufficient for a query 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?

The description is a single sentence that conveys the core purpose without redundancy. It is concise but could benefit from additional details without being verbose.

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 presence of an output schema, return values need not be explained. However, the description omits critical context such as how connection_name is resolved, whether sql can be parameterized, and how the tool fits with siblings like list_connections. This leaves gaps for an agent.

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 description must compensate. It adds minimal context by referencing 'specified connection' and 'SQL query', but does not describe parameter syntax, allowed values, or any constraints (e.g., SQL dialect, query size limits).

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 explicitly states 'Execute a read-only SQL query' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling 'execute_mutation' which is for writes. The addition of 'read-only' clarifies the scope.

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 clearly implies this tool is for read queries (SELECT) and not for mutations, contrasting with sibling 'execute_mutation'. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like 'preview_mutation' for previewing mutations.

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