swql_canned

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

With readOnlyHint=true already covering the safety profile, the description adds real behavior: the return envelope shape and a warning that 'truncated' is measured against the full result set so a capped result must not be treated as complete. It does not mention auth/target permissions or rate limits, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Front-loaded verb+resource in the first line, then return shape, then a structured args list. No filler sentences; the truncation warning and per-arg notes all earn their place.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description usefully supplies the return envelope and truncation semantics, and it documents all four arguments. Slightly incomplete in that it doesn't describe valid params keys per canned query or behavior when name is unknown.

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 carries the burden and mostly succeeds: it explains name comes from swql_library, gives a params example ({"min": 90}), and clarifies target omits for default. The limit line merely repeats the schema default, adding little.

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?

States a specific verb (Run) and resource (named canned SWQL query) and gives concrete examples (nodes_down, flapping_interfaces). The 'canned' + 'from swql_library' framing clearly distinguishes it from the sibling swql_query (ad-hoc) and swql_library (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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the reader infers you run this when a named query exists, and 'name ... from swql_library' routes to the catalog sibling. However, there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over swql_query or any preconditions/exclusions.

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