validate_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool checks query quality and gives suggestions but does not detail the return format, side effects, authentication requirements, or rate limits. Given no annotations, this is adequate but could be more informative about the behavior beyond the core function.

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 front-loaded with a clear title line and uses bullet points for use/non-use cases. Every sentence is purposeful, and the structure is well-organized with no wasted words.

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 presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does, when to use it, and differentiation from siblings. However, it does not mention error conditions or prerequisites beyond the schema, which could be beneficial for completeness.

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 does not add meaning beyond the schema; it merely restates that 'query' is a natural-language query and 'api_key' is optional. No additional formatting or constraints are provided.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Check the quality of a query before submitting a job'. It uses a specific verb ('check quality') and resource ('query'), and distinguishes it from siblings like initialize_query and submit_query in the 'Do not use when' section.

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 includes explicit 'Use when' and 'Do not use when' sections, providing clear context for when to use the tool (quick feedback before spending credits, improving vague queries) and when not to use it (previewing validators/enrichments or running a search), with alternative tools named.

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