redash.get_query

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

With no annotations, the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It warns that returned content is untrusted external data, which is helpful, but it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, causes no side effects, or lacks rate-limit constraints. The safety profile is undercommunicated.

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 at two sentences. The first sentence front-loads the purpose, and the second adds a critical security warning. Every sentence earns its place without superfluous text.

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?

For a simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description should explain what metadata is returned and clarify parameter usage. It fails to do so, leaving gaps in the agent's understanding of inputs and outputs.

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 adds no context about the two parameters (query_id and connection_id). It does not explain what connection_id refers to or how to obtain it, leaving the agent to guess from parameter names alone.

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 'Read metadata for one allowlisted Redash query', specifying the verb (read), resource (metadata of query), and scope (one, allowlisted). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_cached_query_results and fetch_query_results by focusing on metadata rather than results.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., for getting results instead of metadata). No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions are given, leaving the agent to infer usage from the purpose alone.

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