execute_wcps_query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It mentions that binary data results are saved to a temporary file and the path is returned, and instructs to show the query and path to the user. However, it does not disclose error behavior, side effects (e.g., whether queries can modify data), permissions required, or rate limits.

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?

Three sentences with no redundancy: first states purpose, second lists use cases, third explains binary handling and user instruction. Structure is logical and front-loaded.

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 the tool's complexity (query execution), the description covers core functionality and binary handling but lacks output format, error behavior, and permissions. The instruction to show the query and path is helpful but not core behavioral context. Adequate but with clear 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?

The single parameter 'wcps_query' has 0% schema description coverage. The description merely calls it 'the WCPS query' without providing syntax, examples, or constraints. The sibling validate_wcps_query could serve as a reference, but the description does not connect to it.

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 executes a WCPS query in rasdaman and lists specific uses like subsetting, processing, aggregation, and filtering. This distinguishes it from siblings (describe_coverage, list_coverages, validate_wcps_query, wcps_query_crash_course) which have different purposes.

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 suggests when to use the tool ('for spatio-temporal subsetting...') but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives (e.g., using validate_wcps_query for validation). The guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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