Query functions by filters

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

readOnlyHint=true is already provided, and the description adds essentially no behavioral context beyond it — no note on pagination via count/offset, result limits, sorting, or how the multi-clause queries list is combined. For a query tool this leaves real behavioral gaps unfilled.

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 zero filler, and the sibling comparison is placed first. It is arguably too terse for a filtering tool, but nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and the schema fully documents the two parameters. The remaining gap is that 'richer filtering' is undefined and pagination/sorting behavior is never surfaced, leaving the description only minimally adequate.

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 every parameter (count, filter, sort_by, min/max_size, etc.) is already documented in the schema. The description adds nothing about filter syntax or how the queries array/object alternatives behave, so the 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?

States a specific verb (Query) and resource (functions) and explicitly differentiates from the sibling list_funcs by claiming 'richer filtering.' However, it never says what 'richer' means, so an agent must open the schema to learn the actual filter dimensions.

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?

Names list_funcs as the comparator, implying this tool is for cases needing more filtering power than list_funcs offers. But it gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance nor states the concrete conditions that select it over the sibling.

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