squire

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It successfully conveys the sandbox nature ('fresh disposable database'), implying isolation and safety for destructive operations. However, it omits details about return values, error handling behavior, and whether the sandbox persists across calls.

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?

Single dense sentence with zero waste. Front-loaded with the action verb 'Run', covers dialects (SQLite/Postgres), operations (schema/query/migration), and environment (sandbox) efficiently.

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 7 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. The 'sandbox' disclosure is essential for a SQL execution tool, but gaps remain regarding output format, error behavior, and clarification of the migration 'validation' process versus actual application.

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%, establishing a baseline of 3. The description mentions 'SQLite or Postgres' and 'schema, query' which map to parameter names, but doesn't add semantic details like parameter relationships (e.g., that query executes after schema) or valid file formats beyond the schema definitions.

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 uses specific verbs ('Run') and resources ('schema, query, and migration validation') with clear scope ('SQLite or Postgres'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'browser', 'media', or 'audit' by specifying database-specific operations and the sandbox environment.

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?

Implies usage through keywords like 'validation' and 'sandbox' (suggesting testing/isolation use cases), but lacks explicit when-to-use guidance or comparisons to siblings like 'data' or 'verify' that might overlap in functionality.

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