list_queries

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, and the description is consistent with read-only behavior. The description adds some context by revealing the output includes dependency/usage relationships, but it doesn't disclose potential size, pagination, or performance characteristics of listing every query.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the main outcome and lists the key included attributes without extraneous wording. It could be more structured, but there is no waste.

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 description states what is returned but completely omits the meaning of the required 'source' parameter and provides no usage context. Without understanding what source should be, an agent cannot reliably invoke the tool.

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?

The schema has one required parameter, 'source', with 0% description coverage)Skip. The tool description does not mention or explain 'source' at all, leaving the agent without any basis for what value to provide.

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 specifies the resource (queries) and the details included: kind, step count, load destination, and dependencies/usage. It distinguishes this as an aggregate listing tool, especially against siblings like get_query, though it doesn't explicitly state the verb '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?

No guidance is given on when to choose this tool over get_query, dependency_graph, or list_data_sources. The word 'Every' implies a broad listing use case, but there are no explicit context signals, exclusions, or alternatives.

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