Query All Rows

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the pagination behavior past the 25,000-row cap, which is genuinely useful, but adds nothing about rate limits, permission requirements, or the cost of exhaustively paging large result sets despite max_rows defaulting to 100,000.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the action and the distinguishing pagination behavior. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

The description covers the core purpose and the row-cap behavior, and an output schema exists so return values need not be explained. However, for an 8-parameter exhaustive-retrieval tool with no annotations, the lack of guidance on cost, permissions, or when to prefer it over narrower analytics siblings leaves meaningful gaps.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all 8 parameters including enums, defaults, and date formats. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (retrieve) and resource (every row for a query) and distinguishes itself by promising full retrieval past the 25,000-row cap, which sets it apart from siblings like top_queries that likely cap results. It doesn't explicitly name which sibling to use instead, keeping it from a 5.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to the many analytics siblings (query_search_analytics, top_queries, performance_by_date). The agent must infer that this is the exhaustive-retrieval option from the phrase 'every row,' with no stated exclusions or cost warnings.

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