query_dmc_resources

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It says 'query', implying read-only, but does not explicitly state it is safe, nor does it mention pagination, rate limits, or permission requirements. Missing behavioral context.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core purpose. The second sentence is slightly verbose but necessary for the workflow. Could be more concise, but overall efficient.

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 8 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is adequate but incomplete. It lacks details on return format, error handling, and pagination behavior. The workflow mandate adds context but does not fully address the tool's operational details.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema; it only restates the table name. No parameter interactions or additional context are provided.

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 'query individual production resources/equipment (RESOURCE table)', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_resources' and 'query_dmc_workcenters' by focusing on individual resources.

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 includes a required workflow: 'After fetching and analyzing this data, you MUST compile the findings into a report and invoke the send_report_to_teams tool'. This provides strong post-use context, though it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like 'get_resources'.

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