interactive_openroad_query

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description elaborates which commands are allowed and blocks modification commands. However, it does not mention timeout or session behavior, which are parameters. Still, it adds useful context beyond annotations.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and examples, followed by usage guidance. Every sentence adds value with no waste.

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?

Tool has 3 params and an output schema. Description covers core purpose and guidance but omits context like session requirement and return behavior. With output schema present, return value explanation is unnecessary, but the missing session mention reduces completeness.

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?

Input schema has 3 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description only provides examples for the 'command' parameter but does not explain 'session_id' or 'timeout_ms'. Given low coverage, the description should compensate more.

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 verb 'Execute' and the resource 'read-only OpenROAD command', listing specific command families (report_*, get_*, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling 'interactive_openroad_exec' by emphasizing read-only nature.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: for querying design state, generating reports, inspecting timing. Also states when not to use: commands that modify design state are blocked, and directs to the sibling tool interactive_openroad_exec.

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