ouroboros_query_projection

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses 'read-only' up front, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it lacks additional context such as failure modes, result format, or prerequisites beyond what the parameter schema already provides. The read-only designation is valuable but not exhaustive.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the core action and scope. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

The tool is relatively simple with no output schema or annotations, and the description covers the primary purpose. However, it does not describe the shape of the projection, potential failure conditions, or how it relates to the sibling query tool, leaving some gaps for an agent to discover.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description itself adds no parameter information; all semantics come from the schema's detailed descriptions of limit, seed_id, session_id, and execution_id. The schema does the heavy lifting, so no credit is lost or gained beyond baseline.

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 verb 'Build' and the specific resource 'read-only Run/Stage/Step projection' from persisted events for a session or execution aggregate. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ouroboros_query_events, which likely returns raw events rather than a structured projection.

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 usage context ('for a session or execution aggregate') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or alternative tool mentions are provided, leaving the agent to infer when a projection is needed.

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