add_golden_sql

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the query will be stored as a Golden SQL example and explains that the description makes it useful to agents later, adding behavioral context. However, it does not mention permissions, validation, error handling, or side effects.

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 two sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds a concise, valuable usage tip about the description field.

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 create operation, the description covers the core action and an important nuance about the description parameter, but it omits error conditions, validation behavior, or prerequisites. The output schema exists, so return values are not needed, but more context about what makes a valid golden SQL would improve completeness.

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%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that golden_sql is the SQL query and knowledge_base_id identifies the knowledge base, and it specifically explains the purpose of the 'description' parameter. This adds meaning, but it does not detail formats or constraints for the parameters.

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 first sentence clearly states what the tool does: 'Save a SQL query as a Golden SQL example on a knowledge base.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the name 'add_golden_sql' plus sibling tools (list_golden_sql, delete_golden_sql) make its role 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 implies when to use the tool via the verb 'save' and provides a specific usage tip for the description parameter, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives. Guidance focuses on parameter usage rather than tool selection.

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