execute_dataview_query_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions requirements (Obsidian, Dataview plugin, local REST API) and that results are in Dataview's structured format, but does not disclose potential errors, timeouts, or side effects. More details on error behavior would improve transparency.

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 well-organized with clear sections (purpose, types, clauses, when-to-use, requirements). It is concise at ~150 words and every sentence adds value, though the 'Returns' line could be slightly more specific.

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?

For a query tool with no output schema, the description covers the DQL language components, usage scenarios, and prerequisites. It lacks details on error handling or result format specifics, but overall it is fairly complete for the tool's complexity.

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?

Description adds value to the 'query' parameter by listing examples and supported syntax, which supplements the schema. However, the optional 'ctx' parameter is not described at all in the description, and schema coverage is only 50%. 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 clearly states it executes DQL queries and enumerates supported query types (LIST, TABLE, TASK, CALENDAR) and clauses. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_notes_by_tag_dql_tool and search_notes_tool which are simpler.

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 'When to use' section provides four clear scenarios (complex queries, computed fields, metadata indices, real-time results). It implies this tool is for advanced queries beyond basic filesystem capabilities, though it does not explicitly exclude simpler cases.

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