list_queries

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate safety. It adds value by specifying that the tool returns information per field (return type, argument types) and supports substring filtering. No contradictions with annotations.

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 three short sentences, each serving a purpose: stating what the tool does, what output it provides, and when to use alternatives or filters. No extraneous information.

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 simple (2 optional params, no output schema) and annotations cover safety. The description explains the return data (return type and argument types), filtering, and the alternative tool. It could mention default limit or pagination, but the schema provides that, so overall it is adequately complete.

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 descriptions for both search and limit. The description only reinforces the search parameter usage ('Use search= to filter by name substring.') without adding new meaning. The limit parameter's default or behavior is not mentioned, but the schema already covers it adequately.

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 lists all root query fields, with examples (user, posts, search), and specifies what each entry shows (return type and argument types). It distinguishes itself from describe_field, a sibling tool for more detail, and from other sibling tools like list_mutations and list_subscriptions.

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 explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool (to list root query fields) and when to use an alternative (describe_field for more detail on a specific query). It also explains the optional search= parameter for filtering, providing clear usage context.

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