execute_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It highlights that the tool is for reading data and supports complex query features, but it does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior or address potential risks like performance impact or query restrictions.

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 very concise with two sentences: the first states the purpose, and the second lists supported capabilities. No unnecessary words.

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 description covers the main functionality and supported query features. However, it lacks details on return format or error handling, which would be helpful given the absence of an output schema.

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?

Both parameters have 100% schema description coverage. The tool description mentions query language but does not add semantic value beyond the schema descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 purpose: executing arbitrary queries in the 1C query language for reading data. It distinguishes itself from siblings by claiming to be the most powerful reading tool, which sets it apart from other getter tools.

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 implies use for complex data reading tasks but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide 'when not to use' guidance. No siblings are mentioned as alternatives.

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