get_top_queries

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is transparent. The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as what data is returned or any side effects, but it doesn't contradict the annotations either.

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 concise sentence without any unnecessary words. It efficiently communicates the core purpose and earns its place, even though it doesn't provide extensive detail.

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 tool has 4 parameters, an output schema, and annotations, but the description lacks usage guidance and doesn't clarify what constitutes 'top queries' without referencing the schema. For a simple read tool, the provided information is minimally adequate, but more context would improve completeness.

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?

All 4 parameters have schema descriptions with 100% coverage, detailing limit, sort_by, database_name, and window_minutes. The description itself adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the verb 'List' with a specific resource 'top queries from Query Store', which clearly distinguishes it from similar sibling tools like get_top_cached_queries. However, it doesn't define what 'top' means, leaving that to the sort_by parameter, so it's not fully self-contained.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or comparisons to sibling tools such as get_top_cached_queries or get_plan_cache_analysis. The only context is the tool name and a one-line statement.

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