tigergraph__show_query

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context: it returns the full GSQL query text, requires the query to be installed first, and suggests checking existence. This goes beyond annotations without contradicting them.

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 well-structured with clear headers: purpose, Use When, Quick Start, Tips, and Related Tools. The main purpose is front-loaded, and each section adds distinct value without redundancy. It's appropriately sized and easy to scan.

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 simplicity of the tool (show query text) and the presence of safety annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, usage scenarios, prerequisites (installed query), and return value (full GSQL text). It lacks details on error handling or exact output formatting, but these are minor for a read-only operation. No output schema exists, so the description adequately explains the return.

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 coverage is 100% – all three parameters have descriptions in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description provides a quick start example for query_name but doesn't enrich understanding of profile or graph_name beyond what the schema already states. It adds marginal value over the schema.

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's function: 'Show the GSQL text of an installed query.' This is a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes from siblings like run_query (executing) and install_query (installing). The 'Use When' section reinforces the purpose with concrete scenarios.

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 'Use When' section provides explicit scenarios for using this tool, and the tip 'Use is_query_installed to check existence' gives actionable guidance. It lists related tools (install_query, get_query_metadata, is_query_installed) but doesn't explicitly contrast when to use them instead. This is clear but slightly lacks exclusionary guidance.

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