query

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool is SELECT-only and that credentials/sessions/tenants are never reachable, providing important safety and scope constraints. It lacks details like return format, but this is sufficient for a simple query 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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action and includes relevant constraints. Every word adds value, with no 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, allowed tables, and safety. It is complete enough for an AI agent to invoke correctly without further clarification.

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 covers the 'sql' parameter with a description and example. The tool description adds extra meaning by specifying allowed tables (payslips/form106) and the SELECT-only constraint, which are not present in the 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 tool's function: executing a SELECT-only SQL query against specific tables (payslips/form106). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like syncPayslips or downloadCombinedPayslipsPdf, which perform different actions.

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 implies when to use the tool (for read-only SQL queries) and sets boundaries (SELECT-only, only specific tables). While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, the context is clear enough for an AI agent to select it appropriately among siblings.

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