Analytics Query

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by disclosing the setup requirement and the potential for empty results when ClickHouse is not configured. No contradictions with 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?

The description is extremely concise with two sentences: first for purpose, second for prerequisites and behavior. It is front-loaded and contains no wasted words.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are likely documented. The description covers prerequisites and a failure mode. Parameter schema thoroughly documents each parameter and its context. Together, these provide sufficient completeness for a query tool. Slight miss: not all query types are explicitly listed in the description, but they are in the schema.

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% and parameter descriptions are detailed (e.g., listing which query types use each parameter). The description does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Query' and the resources 'vulnerability trends, posture history, and runtime event summaries from ClickHouse.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like audit_query or intel_lookup, which query different data sources. The parameter schema further lists all query types, reinforcing specificity.

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 provides a prerequisite ('Requires AGENT_BOM_CLICKHOUSE_URL to be set') and a fallback behavior ('Returns empty results if ClickHouse is not configured'). However, it does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over alternatives such as audit_query or intel_lookup, which also query data but from different sources.

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