notion_query_data

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

Annotations already convey readOnly=false, destructiveHint=true, openWorld=true, and idempotent=false. The description adds useful scoping context about JWT, tenant, company, and dispatcher routing, but does not explain actual behavior, side effects, or permissions. The 'query' name may misleadingly imply read-only despite the destructive annotation, though there is no explicit textual contradiction.

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 compact and front-loaded, with a scannable Args list and no filler. Some space is devoted to routing mechanics rather than action semantics, but the overall structure is efficient.

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 is flagged destructive/openWorld, has zero required params, and zero schema description coverage, the description is under-specified. It omits what data is actually queried, what side effects may occur, and when to prefer the more specific sibling Notion query tools.

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%, so the description must compensate. It defines message as a free-text objective and inputs as an optional JSON string, which adds basic meaning, but it lacks examples, accepted input keys, or how the dispatcher interprets the structured inputs.

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 essentially restates the tool name as 'run the notion domain agent action query_data' without defining what data is queried or what result is produced. It adds routing mechanics but no semantic content, so an agent cannot distinguish this from notion_query_database, notion_query_data_source, or notion_query_view.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many Notion siblings such as notion_search, notion_query_database, or notion_chat. No exclusions, preferred contexts, or alternative-selection criteria are provided.

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