query_path_analysis

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's 'Query' is consistent but adds no additional behavioral context. It does not disclose output format, limits, or any other side effects beyond what the annotations imply, failing to add value beyond the structured data.

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 sentence with no wasted words and front-loads the core action. It is concise, but the brevity borders on under-specification given the tool's complexity, so it loses a point for being too terse.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the tool is complex with nested objects and an enum. The description does not explain the meaning of direction, how events should be listed, or the time_range structure, making it insufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly in non-trivial cases.

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 must compensate for the four required parameters. It only vaguely references 'selected starting event' (start_event), while events, direction (with enum initial_event/termination_event), and time_range remain unexplained. This leaves the agent without enough information to correctly construct the input.

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 uses the specific verb 'Query' and the resource 'paths around a selected starting event', indicating a read-only path analysis tool. It adds the notion of a starting event, which gives some context beyond the tool name. However, it does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling query_* tools or clarify what 'paths' means, so it lacks sibling differentiation.

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 query_event_analysis or query_funnel_analysis. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction on tool selection.

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