get_queries_with_large_result_count

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes the safety profile, lowering the bar for the description. The description adds the useful context that this reads from the system:completed_requests catalog, but it does not disclose ordering, limit behavior, or any performance implications of large result counts. It meets the minimum for a read-only convenience 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?

Two short sentences, no wasted words. The purpose is stated first, followed by a clear usage directive. The structure is front-loaded and every 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?

For a simple read-only tool with one optional parameter and an output schema present, the description is nearly complete. It names the source catalog and provides routing context. It could go slightly further by clarifying the ordering or default behavior, but the schema and annotations cover most of what an agent needs.

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 the 'limit' parameter fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the 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 states a specific verb ('Get'), a precise resource ('queries with the largest result counts'), and the source catalog ('system:completed_requests'). It also differentiates this tool from the raw query tool by explicitly recommending it over writing a raw system:completed_requests query via run_sql_plus_plus_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 second sentence provides explicit usage guidance: prefer this over a raw system:completed_requests query. It names the alternative tool, but it does not mention when not to use this tool or which sibling to choose for other query-analytics concerns (e.g., response sizes or runtime).

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