get_queries

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral context. It implies a read-only operation ('Get'), but does not disclose any side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or output format. Minimal transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence with no waste. It communicates the core purpose efficiently, though it could include more detail without sacrificing conciseness.

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 has 3 parameters, no output schema, and many siblings, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the returned queries contain, how filtering works (e.g., slow and threshold interplay), or how this differs from similar tools. Completeness is lacking.

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 coverage is 100%, with each parameter having a description (e.g., 'Clockwork request ID', 'Only return slow queries'). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but the schema itself is adequate. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Get database queries for a request,' specifying the verb 'Get' and the resource 'database queries' with context 'for a request.' This is specific enough to understand the tool's basic function, though it does not explicitly distinguish it from siblings like get_query_stats or get_query_stack_trace.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools (e.g., analyze_slow_queries, get_query_stats), the lack of usage direction is a significant gap.

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