query_database

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explains pagination (all pages returned) and parameter constraints, but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, mention authentication needs, or describe error handling. This is adequate but lacks a safety profile.

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 concise, with a clear main sentence followed by bullet points for parameters. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is front-loaded for quick understanding.

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 output schema exists (so return values are covered), the description adequately explains parameter semantics and pagination. It is missing notes on error handling or rate limits, but for a query tool this is nearly complete.

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 0%, so the description must add meaning. It explains that filter_json and sorts_json are JSON strings (with empty defaults for no filter/sort), notes page_size max 100, and clarifies that all pages are returned. This provides significant context beyond the bare schema.

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 the verb 'query' and the resource 'Notion database', and highlights optional filters and sorts. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_database' (metadata) and 'search' (full-text search), providing strong purpose clarity.

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 implies usage for querying database content with optional filtering and sorting, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like 'get_database' or 'search'. It mentions pagination behavior ('All pages are returned') but lacks explicit when-not or alternative tool guidance.

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