Filters Schema

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint true. The description adds context about the tool's purpose without contradicting annotations. It does not detail behavior beyond schema provision, but with annotations present, the description is adequate.

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 bullet points and front-loaded overview. While slightly verbose with examples, it efficiently conveys purpose without unnecessary 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?

Given the presence of an output schema (implied), the description sufficiently covers the tool's role and usage scenarios. It addresses common needs like building complex filters, making it complete for its complexity.

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?

The single parameter 'tool_name' is fully described in the schema with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 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 clearly states the tool retrieves detailed schema information for building filters, with specific examples of use cases like understanding fields and data types. It is distinct from sibling tools which focus on data retrieval or account management.

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 explicitly lists when to use the tool, such as understanding available fields and building JMESPath queries. It provides context for appropriate use, though it does not mention when not to use it or alternatives, which is acceptable given the unique purpose.

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