db_save_query

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the persist operation and scoping, but does not disclose behavior on duplicate names, whether it updates or creates, permissions required, or side effects. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 appropriately concise: a clear purpose sentence followed by a compact Args block. Every line adds relevant information, though the Args section could be more descriptive without much added 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?

While an output schema exists, the description lacks important operational details such as conflict/overwrite behavior, whether the tool creates or updates, and when to prefer it over sibling save tools. For a write operation with no annotations, this leaves the agent without enough context to invoke it confidently.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides one-line explanations for each parameter, with 'The DB Console connection id this saved query belongs to' adding real context, but 'Short label' and 'The SQL text' are minimal and add little beyond the schema titles.

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 ('Persist'), a resource ('a SQL query'), and a scope ('under the caller's user, scoped to a connection'), making the core function clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like athena_save_query, though the mention of 'DB Console connection' hints at the distinction.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as athena_save_query or db_query. The description only states what it does and lists parameters, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context from the tool name and sibling list.

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