creatio_query_records

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

Without annotations, the description explicitly discloses 'read-only GET', which is key behavioral information indicating no mutation. It does not mention that 'top' is clamped to 50 or other potential behaviors like pagination, but the read-only disclosure is valuable.

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 with no fluff: the first states purpose, the second gives usage guidance with an example. Properly front-loaded and concise.

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?

For a read-only query tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, safety, and includes a usage example. It does not describe the return format, but that is implied by 'records' and the OData context, and the schema fills in parameter details.

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 a concrete OData filter example ('Number eq \'SR00042038\'') and reinforces that filter/orderby use OData syntax, which helps the agent construct valid parameter values.

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 records from a Creatio entity via OData (read-only GET), specifying the verb, resource, and method. It also distinguishes from siblings: creatio_get_record for a single record and creatio_list_allowed_entities for listing entities.

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?

It provides usage instruction for OData filter/orderby with an example, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like creatio_get_record or creatio_list_allowed_entities. The context is implied rather than explicit about exclusions.

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