query_inspect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the return type but does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or has no side effects, which is important for behavioral transparency.

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 with two short paragraphs, using clear headers (Args, Returns) and no extraneous information. Every sentence 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?

Given the tool has only one parameter and an output schema exists, the description covers the purpose, parameter usage, and return structure (file_count, schema details) adequately for an agent to use the tool 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?

The description provides an example for the 'glob' parameter (e.g., 'atoms/**/*.md'), adding meaningful context beyond the schema's name and type. With 0% schema coverage, this example compensates well.

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 specifies the verb 'Get' and resource 'frontmatter schema from files matching glob pattern', which is clear and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'query' that likely return content instead of schema.

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 implies usage for inspecting frontmatter schema but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'query' or the batch tools. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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