query_records

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully reveals pagination behavior and the optional geom field for geographic datasets, but it does not mention response shape, error or rate-limit behavior, or the read-only nature beyond the word 'Query'.

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?

Three sentences with no filler: the core capability is stated first, followed by a useful output caveat and a practical prerequisite. The structure is front-loaded and each sentence earns its place.

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 a 9-parameter query tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description does solid work: it explains the query language, pagination, a special output field, and a preparation step. The main gap is not addressing when to choose export_dataset to pull a full dataset instead.

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 78%, so the schema already explains most parameters. The description adds that limit/offset handle pagination and that the ODSQL clauses are where/select/order_by/group_by/q/refine, but it does not substantially deepen the meaning of any individual parameter beyond what the schema provides.

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 is specific about the verb and resource: it queries and filters records within a dataset using ODSQL, and it lists the main query clauses. It clearly targets record-level access rather than dataset-level operations, but it does not explicitly contrast with export_dataset, so a little ambiguity remains.

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?

It gives a clear, actionable prerequisite: call get_dataset first if field names are unknown. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer export_dataset or get_facets over this tool, so exclusions and alternative routing are incomplete.

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