parse_query

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It explains the where syntax and lists supported features, which is helpful. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or describe the response format, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences. It front-loads the core purpose and then provides a compact example of the where syntax. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary fluff.

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 description covers the main capabilities and gives syntax examples, making it fairly complete for a complex query tool. It lacks explicit mention of the return format and the 'count' behavior, but these are documented in the schema. Given no annotations or output schema, it does a good job but has minor gaps.

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 reported as 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so by explaining the where syntax (equality, $gt, etc.) and naming key parameters like where, order, limit, skip, keys, and include. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema, especially for the complex 'where' parameter.

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 it queries multiple objects of a class in Parse Server, with specific capabilities like filtering, ordering, pagination, field selection, and relation inclusion. The verb 'Consulta' and resource 'múltiples objetos de una clase' distinguish it from sibling tools such as parse_get_object (single object) and parse_count.

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 gives clear context for when to use this tool: when querying multiple objects with filters, ordering, pagination, etc. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the scope is well-defined by listing the supported features, making it obvious when this tool is appropriate.

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