show_query

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

Because no annotations are provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the return payload—selections, area of interest, date range, shaped scenes with availability—and the not_found status for missing slugs. It doesn't explicitly state read-only semantics or auth prerequisites, but for a retrieval tool this is solid coverage.

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 compact and front-loaded: purpose in the first line, input source in the second, then return details. Every sentence adds useful information with no filler.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, parameter provenance, return shape, and an error case. An agent can confidently call it and interpret the response correctly.

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 0% and the schema only defines slug as a string. The description compensates by explaining that the slug comes from save_query or list_queries and that an unknown slug returns status='not_found', adding meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Return one saved query by slug, with its scenes.' This clearly identifies the tool as single-query retrieval, distinct from list_queries which lists queries, and from remove_query which deletes them.

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?

It gives concrete guidance on where the slug comes from: 'Give the slug from save_query or list_queries.' This helps the agent know this tool is for already-saved queries and how to obtain valid input, though it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it.

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