openpipeline_dql_autocomplete

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

With no annotations provided, the description adds value by stating the tool is 'safe, read-only', which informs the agent about potential side effects. It does not detail error conditions or permissions but the read-only claim is sufficient for this autocomplete function.

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 sentences, front-loading the purpose and key trait. Every sentence earns its place 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?

Given the tool has no output schema, the description hints at the output via 'autocomplete suggestions' but does not explicitly describe the return format. However, for a simple autocomplete tool, it is reasonably complete for an agent to infer usage.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter (script, cursorPosition, configurationId, protectedFields).

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 'Get' and the resource 'DQL autocomplete suggestions' for a DQL processor script. It distinguishes from sibling tools like openpipeline_matcher_autocomplete by specifying 'DQL' and 'pipeline DQL expressions'.

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 indicates it is 'useful when authoring pipeline DQL expressions', providing clear context for when to use. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or list alternative tools.

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