add_query

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that this is a write operation adding a new query, but that restates the name and adds no information about permissions, validation of the SQL, reversibility, or side effects on existing queries in the report.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the Args block is compact. The second line ("This is a write operation...") partially repeats the first sentence, a small redundancy in an otherwise tight description.

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 needn't be explained, and all four parameters get a gloss. However, with zero schema coverage and no annotations, an agent still lacks detail on parameter formats, error behavior, and any authorization requirements for this mutation.

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 bare titles. It does map all four parameters to their meaning and usefully points at list_data_sources for the data source ID, but gives no format or constraint detail beyond one-phrase glosses.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Add a SQL query to an existing report") and clarifies it creates a new query rather than modifying one, which implicitly separates it from the sibling update_query. It is clear and actionable, though it never names update_query or create_report explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied: this is for attaching a query to an existing report. The only routing help is a pointer to list_data_sources for the data_source_id, which is parameter-level rather than tool-level. No when-not conditions or sibling comparisons are given.

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