bcn.plan_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It clearly states the tool returns a plan without side effects, listing key output components. It lacks details on authorization or rate limits, which is acceptable for a planning tool.

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 single-sentence description is concise and front-loads the purpose. While it could be more structured with bullet points, it avoids unnecessary words.

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 mentions key outputs and has an output schema, but given the complexity (13 parameters, nested objects), it omits details about the output structure and parameter use, leaving the agent with incomplete context.

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 only 8%, and the description does not explain any of the 13 parameters beyond implying 'query' is the natural-language input. This is a significant gap given the number of parameters.

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: planning a natural-language Barcelona city question into an explainable workflow, with a list of return items. It distinguishes from sibling tools like bcn_execute_city_query by noting it does not run the final query, but lacks explicit differentiation from bcn_recommend_resources or bcn_resolve_place.

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 explicitly notes the tool is for planning and 'without running the final data query,' guiding when to use it versus execution tools. However, it does not provide exclusions or mention alternatives like bcn_query_resource for direct queries.

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