query_get_pattern

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description is not required to restate safety behavior. It does add that the tool provides a template for a common pattern, but it does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as what the template contains, whether unknown pattern names fail, or how the template is returned. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

A single sentence states the tool's purpose with no filler. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for a one-parameter, low-complexity tool.

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?

With a single required parameter, a complete enum in the schema, an output schema, and read-only annotations, the description is largely sufficient. The main gap is the lack of usage guidance relative to sibling tools, but that is already penalized under usage_guidelines.

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%: the single pattern parameter lists all accepted values in its description. The tool description adds little beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 and resource: getting a template for a Jaquel query pattern. It is distinct enough from siblings like query_list_patterns (which lists patterns) and query_generate_skeleton (which may generate code), though it doesn't explicitly draw those contrasts.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus related tools such as query_validate, query_get_operator_docs, or query_generate_skeleton. The intended use is only implied by the name and the pattern parameter, not explicitly stated.

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