query_prompt_style_summary

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It reveals it is a daily rollup but omits behavioral details such as data retention, auth requirements, rate limits, or what 'rule-classified' entails. This is a significant gap for a query tool.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word earns its place with no fluff.

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?

Despite good schema coverage and no required params, the tool lacks an output schema and the description does not clarify return format, pagination, or limits. For a query tool with 7 parameters, this is a noticeable gap.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain semantics of parameters like date format, filtering behavior, or the effect of 'all' values.

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 'Daily rollup per prompt style (rule-classified)' and explains its utility as 'useful for understanding how users phrase their requests', effectively answering what the tool does and distinguishing it from sibling summary tools like query_language_summary.

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 a general use case ('understanding how users phrase their requests') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., query_language_summary, query_session_summary) or when not to use it.

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