Get Queue

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It provides zero information about side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or response behavior. The three-word description is utterly insufficient.

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 extremely short, but conciseness requires informative efficiency. Here, it is under-specified, failing to earn its place by omitting critical details. A single sentence without substance.

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?

Given the tool has 11 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and a vague description, the contextual completeness is severely lacking. The agent has no idea what the queue represents, what fields are returned, pagination behavior, or how to use the numerous parameters.

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%, meaning none of the 11 parameters are explained in the description. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema's raw property names, leaving the agent to guess parameter semantics (e.g., what 'to' and 'from' represent).

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 'Return queue records' is a tautology of the tool name and title, providing no differentiation from siblings like 'get_queue_details'. It vaguely identifies the resource but lacks specificity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_queue_details' or other query tools. There is no mention of context, exclusions, or prerequisites.

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