trend_query

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, setting the safety and output expectations. The description adds that it returns trend data bucketed by time, but does not disclose additional behaviors like aggregation method, return format, or pagination. Since annotations already cover core behavioral traits, the description provides marginal extra value.

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 succinct sentence that immediately communicates the tool's purpose and use case. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, with no superfluous 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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters (3 required) and no output schema, the description covers the main use case for trend charts. However, it omits details such as default period count and the nature of the trend data (e.g., count of records per bucket). With openWorldHint=true, some omission is acceptable, but slight improvement would be beneficial.

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%, with each parameter documented. The description does not add new semantics beyond what the schema provides; for example, 'date_field' is described in both. Thus the description adds no additional meaning, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 this tool retrieves 'time-bucketed trend data' for a table, with a specific use case for trend charts. It uses a specific verb 'Get' and defines the resource type (trend data), clearly distinguishing it from sibling query tools like query_records or run_aggregate_query.

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 suggests using it for monthly/weekly trend charts, providing a clear use case. However, it does not offer when-not-to-use guidance or explicitly compare to alternative tools for similar purposes, relying on implicit understanding.

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