redmine_queries_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It does disclose the GET method and the user-visibility scope, which imply a read-only operation, but it does not mention pagination behavior, result shape, or any other API quirks the agent should know.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence provides the essential purpose and endpoint with no filler. Every word adds value, making the description easy to scan and act on.

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?

Adequate for a simple list endpoint, but there is no output schema and no parameter documentation in the description, so the agent must infer return shape and pagination semantics. The lack of guidance around fetch_all and offset/limit behavior leaves 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not compensate by explaining limit, offset, or fetch_all. The parameter names and defaults in the schema hint at pagination, but the description itself adds no meaning to the parameters.

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?

States an explicit verb ('List'), a concrete resource ('saved queries'), and the scope ('visible to the user'), plus the API endpoint. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list tools like redmine_issues_list or redmine_projects_list.

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 resource and endpoint make the intended use inferable, but the description does not explicitly say when to prefer this tool over alternatives or when it should not be used. There is no exclusion guidance, so the usage context remains implicit.

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