List saved queries

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so safety is covered. The description adds the useful behavioral detail that only 'visible' queries are returned, implying permission-scoped results, but says nothing about ordering, pagination behavior, or result size defaults.

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?

A single sentence with the resource and the scoping qualifier front-loaded and no filler. Nothing needs to be cut.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description identifies what is returned, but leaves the undocumented limit/offset semantics and pagination behavior unexplained. Adequate at minimum but with a real gap for the only two inputs.

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% for both limit and offset, so the description carries the full burden and does not address them at all. The phrase 'filters and columns' describes returned fields, not the input parameters, so it does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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 ('Lists the visible saved issue queries') and adds scope detail ('with their filters and columns'), making clear it enumerates definitions rather than executing them. It stops short of explicitly naming the sibling queries_run, so the read-vs-run distinction must be inferred.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no condition that selects this tool over queries_run, and no mention of pagination or result-set expectations. The agent gets a purpose but no routing advice.

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