list_features

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

With no annotations, the description needs to disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'Query' without explaining default behavior, filter combinations, pagination, or permissions. It does not contradict annotations, but offers minimal transparency.

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 sentence that is concise, front-loaded, and contains no fluff or repetition.

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 tool with 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this one-liner is severely incomplete. It fails to explain what the query returns, how filters interact, what include_provenance does, or how account_a/account_b differ from account.

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 only 30%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning to the 'scope' parameter by listing account/pair/event, but ignores all other parameters, leaving parameter semantics underdefined.

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 verb 'Query' and the resource 'extracted features', with a parenthetical specifying the feature types (account / pair / event). This distinctly separates it from siblings like list_seeds and list_runs.

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 phrase 'after ingest+extract' provides clear contextual timing for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it falls slightly short of a 5.

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