Query cataloged read-only data

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly mentions deterministic cursor pagination, incomplete-result reporting, and rejects filesystem access, extensions, DDL, and mutation. This gives the agent a precise safety and behavior model.

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?

Two dense sentences cover purpose, constraints, pagination, and incomplete reporting. Every clause adds value; no filler or redundancy.

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?

The description covers the core operation, constraints, pagination behavior, and result completeness. However, with no output schema, it does not describe the exact shape of results beyond the incompleteness flag, and it assumes the agent knows what 'cataloged views' are. Still, this is quite complete for a flexible SQL query tool.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must add meaning. It does so by explaining that the sql must be a single parameterized SELECT/WITH, that pagination is cursor-based, and that values are parameterized. This adds meaningful context beyond the raw schema.

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 action ('query'), the resource ('cataloged read-only data'), and the specific mechanism ('parameterized SELECT or WITH … SELECT'). The phrase 'Advanced fallback' distinguishes this from the domain-specific sibling tools.

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 gives clear usage context by labeling it an 'Advanced fallback' and by specifying allowed operations (SELECT/WITH over cataloged views only). It does not explicitly name alternative tools or say when not to use it, but the constraints provide strong guidance.

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