query_fleet

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full burden. While it states that results are merged and lists actions, it does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, has rate limits, or what side effects occur. This is insufficient for a tool that executes SQL queries across multiple nodes.

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 extremely concise at three sentences. It front-loads the main purpose and prerequisite, then lists actions with brief explanations. Every sentence is necessary and informative, with no wasted 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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description should elaborate on return values. It only vaguely mentions 'merged results' and short action descriptions. It does not cover pagination, error handling, or the structure of the merged output, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining what each action returns (e.g., 'causal chains sorted by severity' for chains, 'raw SQL fan-out with node column' for sql). This helps agents choose the correct action and understand expected output.

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's purpose: query multiple Ingero nodes and return merged results. It lists specific actions (chains, ops, overview, sql) that distinguish it from sibling tools like get_causal_chains or run_sql, which operate on individual nodes or queries. The verb 'Query' and resource 'multiple Ingero nodes' are precise.

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 mentions a prerequisite (fleet.nodes configured) but does not explicitly tell when to use this tool vs alternatives. It implies usage for fleet-level aggregated queries, but lacks guidance on when not to use it or which sibling to choose for specific tasks.

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