query_rows

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and usefully discloses that rows are masked by default and that reveal changes sensitive-field exposure plus filtering behavior. It also notes parameterized values and the 1..10000 limit range, but it omits permission requirements, error behavior, and offset/search semantics.

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 compact and front-loaded, with the core read and masking behavior stated first. The where syntax and operator list are dense but useful, and there is little wasted wording.

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 seven-parameter query tool with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, the description covers only part of the parameter surface. The output schema reduces the need to explain return values, but missing guidance for fields, offset, and search leaves the definition incomplete for correct invocation.

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% across seven parameters, so the description must compensate. It explains where syntax and operators, the limit range, and reveal behavior, but it leaves fields, offset, search, and table semantics undocumented beyond their bare schema titles.

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 states a specific verb and resource: "Read rows," with an immediate scope qualifier that rows are masked by default. It clearly separates this from sibling write tools like insert_row/update_row/delete_row, though it does not explicitly route against list_due_items or get_history.

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 by "Read rows" and made concrete for sensitive data via "reveal=true explicitly exposes sensitive fields and enables filtering them." However, there is no explicit when-not guidance or comparison to query alternatives such as list_due_items or get_history.

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