dune-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but lacks critical behavioral details. It mentions 'allow_partial_results' but doesn't explain what happens when data exceeds limits (e.g., truncation behavior, error handling). It also doesn't disclose authentication needs, rate limits, or whether this is a read-only operation (though 'Get' implies it).

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 well-structured with a clear purpose statement followed by organized parameter explanations and return information. Every sentence earns its place, though the 'Args:' and 'Returns:' sections could be slightly more integrated with the main description for better flow.

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 7-parameter tool with no annotations but an output schema (implied by 'Returns: Query results as CSV string'), the description adequately covers parameters and purpose. However, it lacks behavioral context (e.g., error conditions, performance characteristics) that would be helpful given the tool's complexity and data manipulation capabilities.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by providing clear explanations for all 7 parameters. Each parameter gets a concise definition that adds meaning beyond the schema (e.g., 'SQL ORDER BY expression' for sort_by, 'SQL WHERE clause' for filters), making this excellent for parameter understanding.

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 specific action ('Get the latest results'), resource ('of a saved query'), and format ('in CSV format'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'get_query_results' (which presumably returns a different format) and 'get_execution_results_csv' (which works on executions rather than saved queries).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_query_results' or 'get_execution_results_csv'. It mentions 'latest results' but doesn't clarify prerequisites (e.g., whether the query must be saved or executed first) or exclusions.

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