query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states that only SELECT and SHOW are allowed and that write operations are blocked, and it also describes the epoch parameter's effect on response precision. This covers key behaviors, though it does not mention error handling, rate limits, or response structure (mitigated by the presence of an output schema).

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 exceptionally concise and front-loaded, with the main purpose in the first sentence and a clearly structured Args list. Every sentence is informative, and the content is not padded. Mild redundancy ('read-only' and 'write operations are blocked') does not detract from overall clarity.

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 its complexity as a query tool and the existence of an output schema, the description covers the essential operational aspects: language, allowed commands, parameter meanings, and response precision. It is complete enough for an agent to use the tool effectively without additional context.

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%, so the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter in the Args section. It provides the database name, an InfluxQL example with a LIMIT clause, and a list of valid epoch precision values with a default. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare 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 states the tool executes a read-only InfluxQL query against a database, with a specific verb ('Execute') and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by emphasizing read-only SELECT/SHOW queries, while siblings like list_databases and list_measurements provide targeted metadata lookups.

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 clearly states allowed statement types and that write operations are blocked, giving implicit context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when to prefer the specialized list_* sibling tools over a general query, so the guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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