execute_query

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

The description contributes no behavioral information beyond what the annotations already declare (e.g., destructiveHint=true). It does not disclose side effects, execution semantics, or any constraints beyond the schema, making it a bare restatement of the title.

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, direct sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded and instantly understandable, though minimal.

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 is relatively simple and benefits from a full input schema, output schema, and annotations, which cover many gaps. However, the description does not mention usage context or distinguish this from sibling tools like compile_query, leaving a moderate completeness gap.

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 provides clear descriptions for all three parameters (query, limit, instance_key), achieving 100% coverage. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, the description adds no further parameter semantics, warranting the baseline score.

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 action ('Execute') and resource ('a TimeBase QQL query'), making the tool's purpose evident. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like compile_query, which is a similar but distinct operation.

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 compile_query or get_stream_messages. There are no stated prerequisites, exclusions, or context suggesting the appropriate use case.

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