thruk_query

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

No annotations are provided, and the description offers no information about behavioral traits such as authentication, rate limits, or potential side effects. For a tool that can invoke arbitrary endpoints, this is a significant gap.

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 with two short sentences, containing no filler words. Every word adds value.

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?

With five parameters, no output schema, and the tool being a catch-all for arbitrary endpoints, the description is too minimal. It lacks guidance on how to use the method, data, and params parameters effectively.

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 40%; only the 'path' and 'backends' parameters have descriptions in the schema. The description adds meaning to 'path' but does not explain 'data', 'method', or 'params'.

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 is an escape hatch for calling any Thruk REST endpoint, with a specific instruction on the path parameter. This distinguishes it from the many sibling tools that target specific operations.

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 term 'escape hatch' implies use when no specific tool exists, but the description does not explicitly state when to use it vs. alternatives or when to avoid it.

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