db_query

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the key safety trait: read-only, limited to SELECT/WITH/EXPLAIN, returning rows. It does not mention permissions, timeouts, cost/rate limits, error behavior, or whether the limit applies to returned rows versus scanned rows.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and read-only constraint, with no wasted words. The parenthetical statement-type restriction is compact and useful.

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, safety restriction, and return shape at a high level, which is adequate for a read-only query tool. However, with no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema description coverage, the missing parameter semantics for 'limit' and 'params' leave clear gaps an agent would need to guess.

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, but it only vaguely implies the 'sql' parameter. It says nothing about 'limit' (including its default of 200 and max of 1000) or about 'params' as bound values, leaving two of three parameters undocumented anywhere.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Run a read-only SQL query ... against the local database') and states the return ('return the rows'). The read-only restriction also distinguishes it from the sibling db_execute, which handles writes.

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?

It clearly scopes when this tool applies by restricting allowed statements to SELECT/WITH/EXPLAIN, which implicitly excludes writes and routes them elsewhere. It does not explicitly name db_execute or db_list_tables as alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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