query_base

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits but it does not. It does not confirm the operation is read-only, describe return data format, or mention any side effects like pagination or active vault requirements. 'Query' implies safety but is not explicit.

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?

Two short sentences that are front-loaded with the action and resource. No redundant words; the second sentence adds a small but relevant detail on how filtering works.

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?

The tool has moderate complexity (5 parameters, nested filter object) and no output schema or annotations. The description covers the basic query capability but omits return value structure and any behavioral context, which would be needed for safe invocation.

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?

The input schema already documents all 5 parameters with clear descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description's 'Filter by providing column-value pairs' merely restates the filter parameter's schema example and adds no new semantics beyond the 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 identifies the action ('Query') and resource ('Obsidian Base'), and notes the optional capabilities (filter, sort, limit). This makes it distinct from sibling tools like get_base or search_vault, as it's specifically for querying base data with filtering.

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 guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of excluding cases, prerequisites, or alternative tools like get_base or search_vault. The description only states capabilities, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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