list_exploration_queries

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

The description claims 'Returns max 100 results by default' but the schema shows a default of 1000 for the limit parameter. This contradiction misleads. Additionally, force_refresh and repository parameters are not mentioned, omitting important behavioral traits.

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, but the limit default discrepancy reduces clarity. Front-loading is good.

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 no annotations or output schema, the description should cover pagination, default limits, caching (force_refresh), and repository filtering. It fails to address these, leaving the agent underinformed.

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% but the description only maps to solution, name, query_contains, and path_contains. Repository parameters and force_refresh are omitted, leaving gaps. The description adds some value but not full compensation.

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 tool lists Microsoft Sentinel exploration queries and specifies searchable fields (solution, name, query content, file path). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling list tools like list_hunting_queries, but the resource type is distinct.

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 versus alternatives. With many list tools available, the agent lacks criteria to choose.

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