assets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'query' without detailing return format, pagination behavior, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only in a meaningful way. This is a significant gap.

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 starts with a clear one-liner but then includes a long, truncated example variable block that is difficult to parse and not well-structured. It is not concise or well-organized for quick agent consumption.

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?

This is a complex query tool with a GraphQL filter object, no output schema, and no annotations. The description provides almost no context on return values, pagination, filter usage, or expected behavior, making it inadequate for the complexity level.

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 covers all parameter names and types, so baseline is 3. The description adds an example variables block showing the nested filter structure, which provides some semantic context beyond bare types, but it is truncated and does not explain each parameter in depth.

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 'query assets', identifying the specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from mutation tools like delete_asset, though it doesn't differentiate from sibling query tools like cases or incidents.

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 provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or comparisons to sibling query tools, leaving the agent without direction on selection.

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