Run saved query

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations by explaining that extraWhere is 'passed as-is and AND-ed' with the saved query's WHERE clause, plus a concrete example. No side effects or contradictions are present; the readOnly annotations align with the execution 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?

Two sentences carry the core purpose, the optional filtering behavior, and a useful example. There is no redundant repetition of schema fields, and the most important scoping information is front-loaded.

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 read-only query execution tool, the description is sufficient: it identifies the resource, the result type, and the key extension mechanism. The remaining details (field selection, formatting, top count) are well covered by the input schema, and no output schema exists to describe return shape further.

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 schema already documents all parameters. The description adds value by explaining queryId accepts either a GUID or path and by giving a concrete WIQL example for extraWhere, including the 'passed as-is' caveat.

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 action ('Execute a saved query') and a clear resource ('by GUID or path'), and specifies the result ('return the matching work items'). It is distinct from sibling tools like run_wiql or get_work_item because it explicitly targets saved queries.

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 clearly establishes when to use it: when a saved query exists and needs execution, optionally with an extra WIQL filter. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as run_wiql, but the saved-query focus is clear enough to guide selection.

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