get_gaql_reference

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It indicates this is a reference lookup (read-only in nature) and adds useful context about avoiding common errors. It doesn't explicitly state it is read-only, but the phrase 'reference guide' strongly implies no side effects, and the source note adds credibility.

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 concise, front-loaded with the main purpose, and uses three clear sentences. The source attribution line is slightly extraneous but acceptable; the overall structure is efficient and scannable.

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 simple reference tool with zero parameters and an output schema available, the description is complete. It explains what, when, and why, and the output schema covers return details. No critical information is missing.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially complete. The description doesn't need to explain parameters; the baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description adds no unnecessary parameter-related noise.

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 returns a GAQL reference guide, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like execute_gaql by describing its role as a pre-query reference, and it explicitly mentions preventing common GAQL errors.

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 explicitly instructs to call before writing complex queries and explains the benefits (correct field names, operators, resource relationships). It does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternative tools, but the context makes the appropriate usage clear.

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