search_public_queries

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

No annotations provided; description implies a read-only search but does not disclose any behavioral traits like auth requirements, rate limits, or side effects. The burden is entirely on the description, which is insufficient.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences, no filler. Every word serves a purpose, front-loading the action and use case.

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 single parameter and existence of an output schema, the description provides minimal but adequate context for a simple search tool. However, it does not explain the concept of 'public queries' or the structure of results beyond what the output schema might cover.

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 0%, meaning the description does not explain the 'query' parameter beyond the schema. It says 'by keyword' but adds no details on format, length, or constraints, failing to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 clearly states it searches public queries by keyword and hints at discovering table names from SQL. Distinguishes from siblings like list_user_queries and search_spellbook, though could be more explicit about what 'public queries' are.

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?

Provides a specific use case ('discover table names') but lacks explicit when-not-to-use instructions or comparisons to alternatives. The phrase 'Use this to' offers some guidance.

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