get_scheduled_query

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond that: the return payload (SQL, destination, recent runs) and the newest-first ordering of runs.

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?

Front-loaded with the retrieval scope, then a compact when-to-use sentence, then a terse Args block that earns its place given the empty schema descriptions. No sentence is wasted.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully previews what is returned (SQL, destination, recent runs). Combined with parameter coverage and usage routing, it is nearly complete; only defaults and run-detail shape are left implicit.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden, and it defines all three parameters: query as name or the id from list_scheduled_queries, runs as the count of recent runs newest-first, and environment as the configured environment to search. It does not note the runs/environment defaults, but the semantics are otherwise well covered.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one scheduled query in full') and enumerates what the full retrieval contains: SQL, destination, and recent runs. This cleanly distinguishes it from the sibling list_scheduled_queries, which returns summaries rather than one query's details.

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?

Gives explicit trigger conditions – call after list_scheduled_queries to diagnose failures or inspect the SQL behind a table – which is clear sequencing guidance. It stops short of stating when not to use it (e.g., for bulk inspection), but the context is unambiguous.

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