firestore-query-collection-by-path

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool queries documents but doesn't describe critical behaviors: whether it's read-only or has side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or return format. The mention of 'supports subcollections' adds some context, but overall behavioral traits are inadequately covered for a query 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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Query documents in a collection') and adds a clarifying note ('using full path (supports subcollections)'). There is zero waste, and every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 tool's complexity (4 parameters with nested objects, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral aspects like safety, performance, or output format, which are crucial for a query tool. While the schema covers parameters well, the description doesn't compensate for missing annotations or output schema, leaving gaps in overall understanding.

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%, so the schema fully documents all parameters (collectionPath, filters, limit, orderBy). The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, mentioning 'full path' and 'supports subcollections' which aligns with collectionPath but doesn't provide additional syntax or usage details. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 resource ('documents in a collection'), specifying the action and target. It distinguishes from siblings like 'firestore-get-collection-by-path' by emphasizing querying with filters rather than simple retrieval. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with 'firestore-query-collection' (without '-by-path'), leaving some sibling differentiation incomplete.

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 provides minimal guidance, mentioning 'supports subcollections' which hints at when to use this over simpler collection queries. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use scenarios, prerequisites, or alternatives compared to siblings like 'firestore-query-collection' or 'firestore-get-collection-by-path'. No exclusions or detailed context are provided.

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