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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and a closed world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the app-scoping context; it says nothing about what a missing/expired session or query id does, or whether the result is filtered by the supplied columns.

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 short sentence with the 'App only' constraint front-loaded and no filler. It is tight, though the parenthetical is more illustrative than informative.

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?

Three fully undocumented required parameters plus no output schema means the description must carry the semantic load, and it doesn't — the agent knows the general area but not the contract for calling it correctly.

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% and all three parameters are required. The description never explains what session_id and query_id identify, nor whether the columns array is a projection/filter or an ordering — an agent cannot tell how to populate the array from this text.

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 says it catalogs columns for the rows of a saved screen result, which is a recognizable resource, but the verb 'catalog' is ambiguous (retrieve? register? describe?) and it never distinguishes itself from close siblings like qanvo_app_result or qanvo_app_catalog.

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?

'App only' scopes the tool to the app surface, and '(view tabs, column chooser)' hints at the UI contexts where it applies, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-to-use-something-else guidance and no mention of a prerequisite call to obtain session_id/query_id.

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