yamlquery

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool does not load the entire file, supports nested keys, array indices, wildcards, and returns typed values. Missing error handling details reduce the score slightly, but core behavior is well covered.

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 (5 sentences) and well-structured. It front-loads the primary purpose, then details syntax, examples, and use case. Every sentence contributes meaning without redundancy.

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 key aspects: query syntax, examples, return format, and token-saving benefit. It is missing details on error handling (e.g., missing path) and clarifies that `file_path` is needed despite being optional in schema. Overall, it provides sufficient context for a query tool.

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 value beyond schema by providing examples of valid query paths and explaining dot-notation, wildcards, and indexing. This enriches understanding of the `query` parameter but adds little to `file_path` description.

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: querying YAML files using dot-notation. It specifies the resource (YAML file) and action (query with path). It distinguishes from siblings like `jsonquery` by focusing on YAML and emphasizing token savings, though explicit sibling differentiation is absent.

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 explicitly advises using the tool 'to extract specific values from large YAML files to save tokens,' providing clear context. However, it does not mention when not to use it or alternative tools, which would strengthen guidance.

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