Run a saved query

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description contributes useful context by stating the return shape (matching issues plus total_count), but says nothing about pagination behavior despite limit/offset parameters.

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, information-dense sentence that front-loads the action and the result. Zero wasted words.

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 tool whose annotations already cover safety, the description is adequate but leaves gaps: no guidance on sourcing query_id, and no explanation of limit/offset pagination semantics, which matter because there is no output schema.

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 only 33%: query_id is documented in the schema, but limit and offset have no descriptions in either the schema or the description. The description mentions no parameters at all, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap on the pagination parameters.

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+resource ('Runs a saved issue query') and even names the return payload ('matching issues plus total_count'). It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like queries_list or search_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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. The agent is not told that query_id must come from queries_list, nor when this beats issues_list or search_query. Usage is only faintly implied by 'saved issue query'.

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