execute_wcps_query

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

Describes return format and an important user instruction. However, with no annotations, it lacks details on side effects, authorization needs, or mutability. Basic disclosure but not comprehensive.

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?

Four sentences, each carrying distinct information: action, use cases, return, instruction. No fluff, front-loaded. Slightly more could be condensed but overall well-structured.

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?

Covers main purpose, typical usage, return type, and a user instruction. Missing error behavior, query construction guidance, or performance notes. Adequate for a simple tool but not exhaustive.

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 description must compensate. It only vaguely mentions what the query does (subsetting, etc.) but does not explicitly describe the wcps_query parameter format, syntax, or constraints.

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?

Clearly states it executes a WCPS query and lists typical use cases (subsetting, processing, aggregation, filtering). Distinguishes from siblings like describe_coverage and list_coverages.

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?

Implies when to use via listed use cases but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternative tools. No direct comparison to siblings.

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