query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the critical read-only nature, which is useful safety information. However, it does not mention result set behavior, error handling, or constraints like single-statement execution, so the behavioral disclosure is minimal beyond the read-only guarantee.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action and its primary constraint with zero filler. Every word contributes to the agent's understanding.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequate but not rich. It omits return format details, but the SELECT semantics strongly imply a result set. It would benefit from noting whether the server parameter is only for selecting among configured servers.

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 100%, so both parameters (sql and server) are already well documented in the schema. The description adds no extra parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('Execute'), a specific resource ('a SELECT query'), and a clear scope ('readonly operations only'). This distinguishes it from the sibling metadata tools (list_servers, list_tables, describe_table), which do not run arbitrary SQL.

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 context for using this tool is implied: it is for running read-only SELECT queries against data. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus the alternative sibling tools, nor any exclusions or prerequisites (e.g., 'use list_tables first to discover tables').

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