get_favorite_queries

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states a basic retrieval operation without mentioning that it is read-only, how pagination behaves, or any ordering. The description does not add value beyond the name and relies on implicit understanding.

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, clear sentence. It is concise and to the point, with no unnecessary words. However, it could be slightly more informative without sacrificing conciseness.

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 the low complexity of the tool (two simple pagination parameters, no output schema), the description is adequate. It covers the main purpose, though it lacks details on pagination behavior and return format. For a basic list operation, it suffices.

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% for both parameters (page and pageSize), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning, such as default values, maximum page sizes, or behavior when omitted.

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 retrieves queries marked as favorites by the current user. It specifies the verb 'get', the resource 'favorite queries', and the scope 'by the current user'. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'get_my_queries' (all user queries) and 'get_favorite_dashboards' (different resource).

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, such as 'get_my_queries' for all queries or 'add_query_favorite' for marking favorites. No when-not or context is given, so the agent cannot easily decide when this is the correct tool.

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