query_request_count

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

No annotations, so description carries full burden. It implies read-only but doesn't explicitly state non-destructive nature, authentication needs, or rate limits. No behavioral details beyond 'query'.

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?

Single sentence that is clear and front-loaded. Efficient, though could benefit from slight elaboration.

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?

No output schema, and description doesn't explain the time series return format (e.g., intervals, units, data points). Incomplete for agent to anticipate output structure.

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 has 100% description coverage, so the schema already explains each parameter. The description adds no extra semantic value beyond the schema (e.g., relationship between scope and time range). Baseline 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 clearly states it queries CDN request count time series data, specifying the resource and output type. It distinguishes from siblings like query_cdn_traffic (traffic) and query_hit_request_count (hit count), though could be more precise.

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 guidance provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given many sibling query tools, explicit usage context (e.g., when to use request_count vs hit_request_count) is missing.

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