arango_query_builder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states 'execute' but does not clarify whether the tool is read-only or modifies data, nor does it mention side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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 a single sentence that bundles two actions ('build and execute'). While concise, it could benefit from a brief breakdown of the key steps or a note on the output. It is not front-loaded with the most critical information.

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 6 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what the returned data looks like, error handling, or how 'execute' affects data. The description is incomplete for an agent to use the tool reliably.

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 low (33%), with only return_fields and database having descriptions. The tool description mentions 'filters, sort, and limit' but adds no extra meaning beyond their names. The nested schema for filters and sort is detailed but the description does not explain how to use them effectively, failing to compensate for the low coverage.

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 function: 'Build and execute a simple AQL query from filters, sort, and limit.' It uses a specific verb-resource pair ('build and execute' + 'AQL query') and distinguishes from siblings like arango_query (raw AQL) and arango_explain_query (query explanation).

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 implies it's for 'simple' queries, offering some guidance on scope, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like arango_query or when not to use it (e.g., for complex queries or graph traversals).

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