list_long_running_queries

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, potential costs, required permissions, or any side effects. The only behavioral hint is the 'long-running' qualifier in the name.

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 concise, with a clear one-line summary followed by a structured Args list. No extraneous information. However, it could be slightly more compact by integrating the parameter descriptions more efficiently.

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 that an output schema exists, return values are not required in the description. The description adequately covers input parameters and the source table. However, it lacks context about ordering, the definition of 'long-running', and typical use cases, making it minimally complete.

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 the description must explain each parameter. It does so effectively for workspace, item, limit, since, and until, adding meaning beyond the schema's type/default information. However, the 'since' and 'until' descriptions could be slightly more precise.

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 returns long-running queries from a specific view (queryinsights.long_running_queries). It uses a specific verb ('Return') and resource, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like list_running_queries or list_frequent_queries.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or list sibling tools for comparison. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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