metadata.query

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits but only states 'Query metadata by key.' It fails to explain whether the operation is read-only (likely, but not stated), what happens on missing keys, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a metadata access tool.

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 a single, concise sentence at 24 characters, making it easy to scan. It earns a 4 because it is well-structured for rapid parsing, though it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 binary analysis domain, the tool name 'metadata.query' is ambiguous among multiple metadata tools. With no output schema, no parameter descriptions, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. The tool likely returns metadata values, but that is not stated.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for missing parameter documentation. It names the 'key' concept but does not explain what values are valid for the key parameter, the format of session_id, or the meaning of the return value. This leaves the agent with only the schema property names and types.

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 states the tool queries metadata by key, which is a clear verb-resource pair. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like metadata.store, metadata.remove, function.metadata_query, and project.metadata_query, leaving ambiguity about which metadata namespace is being accessed.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as function.metadata_query or project.metadata_query. The description does not clarify whether this operates on binary-level, function-level, or project-level metadata, making selection difficult.

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