Run Query

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavior: read-only execution, return structure (meta, data, rows, statistics, hints), and validation rejecting unsafe statements. It accurately portrays the tool's side-effect-free nature.

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-organized with clear headings and bullet-like lists. Every sentence adds value—purpose, exclusions, return info, usage scenarios, workflow tips. No wasted text despite moderate length.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, return format, and usage boundaries. It also provides workflow guidance and key trigger phrases, making it self-contained.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds guidance on preferred SQL practices (bounded SELECT with LIMIT for exploration), which provides extra semantic value beyond the schema's description.

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 states the tool executes a read-only SQL query against RawTree and explicitly excludes mutation operations like INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE. It differentiates from sibling tools (insert-from-url, delete-table, etc.) and provides verb+resource specificity.

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 explicit when-to-use scenarios (user questions about data, verifying inserts, quick aggregates) and trigger phrases. It also states when not to use (mutation operations) and recommends starting with bounded SELECT queries with LIMIT.

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