query_work_items

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention that WIQL overrides other filters (a key behavior captured only in the schema), nor does it describe pagination, default limits, or return format. The word 'Query' implies a read operation, but safety is not explicitly stated.

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 concise sentence that clearly conveys the core functionality. It is well-structured and free of unnecessary words, though it is brief given the tool's complexity.

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 9 optional parameters and no output schema, yet the description is only one sentence. It does not clarify expected return values, the precedence of WIQL over filters, or when to choose this tool over related siblings like get_work_item. The brevity leaves significant gaps for a tool with this parameter count.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds the high-level distinction between WIQL and simple filters, but does not explain individual parameter semantics beyond the schema. The schema itself already provides clear descriptions for all 9 parameters, so the description adds marginal value.

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 queries work items using WIQL or simple filters. It identifies a specific verb ('Query') and resource ('work items'), which distinguishes it from single-item retrieval tools like get_work_item, though it does not explicitly name that sibling alternative.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_work_item or list_work_item_types. The description only mentions two query modes (WIQL or filters) but does not state use cases, exclusions, or prerequisites.

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