query_bi_temporal

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only says 'Query' without disclosing side effects, permission needs, performance characteristics, or pagination. Does not state whether the operation is read-only or has side effects (though query implies read). Insufficient for a complex bi-temporal 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?

One sentence covering core functionality. It is not verbose and front-loads key information. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., separated sections for when to use), but acceptable for a short 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?

Despite 100% schema coverage, the description omits return format, expected behavior with multiple parameters, and typical use cases. With no output schema, the agent needs more context on what the response contains. The description feels incomplete for a 6-parameter bi-temporal query tool.

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% with each parameter described clearly (e.g., 'Query state as of this transaction time'). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, achieving baseline. No parameters are left unexplained.

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?

Description states 'Query relationships with temporal constraints' and lists specific temporal dimensions (valid time, transaction time, context windows). The verb and resource are clear, and the tool is distinguishable from generic sibling tools like 'temporal_query' by mentioning bi-temporal aspects. Lacks explicit mention of what 'relationships' refers to.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Does not state prerequisites, context, or situations to avoid. With many similar sibling tools (e.g., temporal_query, get_bi_temporal_stats), explicit usage guidelines are missing.

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