Create a query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It notes the mutation nature implicitly ('creates') and explains datasource-derived context, but doesn't mention whether queries are saved automatically, whether the query is immediately executable, dependencies on publishing, or how the operation affects the app state beyond creation.

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?

Two concise sentences, no filler. The first states the action and scope, the second adds necessary dependency context. Every word earns its 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?

For a creation tool with 4 fully-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. The datasource-derived plugin/workspace note addresses the main implicit dependency. However, it lacks guidance on what a successful creation returns or what happens on failure, which is partially mitigated by no output schema being expected.

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 coverage is 100%, so the structured fields already document all 4 parameters. The description adds minor value by noting that the plugin and workspace are taken from the datasource, which clarifies that datasourceId drives those dependencies. However, it doesn't elaborate on name naming conventions or body format beyond what the schema states.

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 a specific verb+resource ('Creates a query on a page against an existing datasource'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like appsmith_update_query and appsmith_delete_query. It states the resource type (query) and its two anchoring entities (page, datasource), which differentiates it well.

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 clarifies that the plugin and workspace are derived from the datasource, which is useful context. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs appsmith_update_query or appsmith_execute_query, nor does it mention prerequisites like needing an existing page and datasource (though these are implied by parameter names).

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