Query Nodes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Query' weakly implies a read, but there is no statement about permissions, read-only safety, result volume, default limits, or ordering behavior beyond the parameter names.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler, listing the four capability axes in a sensible order. It is terse rather than padded, though brevity here comes at the cost of substance.

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 7 all-optional, entirely undocumented parameters and no annotations, the description leaves too much unexplained for an agent to call this confidently. The presence of an output schema excuses it from describing return values, but parameter formats and read-only behavior remain unaddressed.

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 0% for 7 parameters, so the description must compensate. It names filters, sorts, includes and pagination (mapping loosely to filters, sorts, include, page_limit/page_offset) but gives no syntax or format for any of them, and bundle and fields are not mentioned at all.

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?

States a specific verb (Query) and resource (nodes) plus the capability surface (filters, sorts, includes, pagination), so an agent knows this is a filtered list operation rather than a single-record fetch. It does not, however, distinguish itself from neighbors like get_node or the many other *_list tools.

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?

No statement of when to use this versus get_node, db_query, or other node/content tools, and no prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is only inferable from the name and the word 'filters'.

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