tomlquery

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

With no annotations, the description covers key behaviors: it queries without loading the entire file, supports nested keys, array indices, and wildcards, and returns the matched value with type and pretty-printed JSON for objects/arrays. It does not mention error handling or permissions, but the core functionality is well-described.

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: two sentences plus example paths. The first sentence immediately states purpose and key feature, followed by syntax detail and examples. No superfluous language.

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 tool's complexity (filesystem query with special syntax) and lack of output schema, the description covers purpose, syntax, return format, and token-saving benefit. It does not address error cases or explicitly differentiate from sibling JSON/YAML query tools, but it is largely complete for an agent to use 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 100%, so the description adds value primarily by providing examples and syntax for the 'query' parameter. However, it does not clarify the relationship between 'file_path' and 'path' (aliases), missing an opportunity to reduce ambiguity. 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 tool queries a TOML file using dot-notation paths, with specific syntax examples. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on TOML format, and the verb 'Query' and resource 'TOML file' are explicit.

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 advises using the tool to extract specific values from large TOML files to save tokens, giving a clear use case. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives like jsonquery or yamlquery, but the context is sufficient.

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