query_decisions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the query modes but doesn't mention behavior like default limit, ordering, pagination, or whether 'all recent decisions' requires no parameters. The default limit of 10 is only in the schema, not the description, and the description doesn't clarify what 'recent' means.

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 that front-loads the main action and lists the query modes efficiently. It earns its place with no wasted words, though it could be slightly more 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?

For a read-only query tool with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description is adequate but not complete. It doesn't explain return format, ordering, or how the three modes interact (e.g., can query and category be combined?). The lack of annotations raises the burden, and the description doesn't fully meet it.

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 three parameters. The description adds the concept of 'natural language' and 'category' as query modes, which aligns with the parameters, but doesn't add detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a clear verb ('Query') and resource ('recorded decisions') and lists three access modes: natural language, category, or all recent decisions. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like record_decision (write) and find_precedents (precedent search), though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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 implies usage for retrieving decisions, and the optional parameters suggest flexible querying. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings like find_precedents or get_graph_summary, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternatives.

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