swql_library

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It clearly marks the operation as '[READ]' and states the output shape ('name + description'), making the read-only nature and return content explicit. It also implies that this tool does not execute queries by directing execution to swql_canned.

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 compact and front-loaded: the action, output, and read-only marker appear first, followed by the sibling routing note and the parameter explanation. Every sentence earns its place, and the Args block is minimal and clear.

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?

For a simple one-optional-parameter read-only list tool, the description is complete: it states what is listed, what the output contains, how it relates to swql_canned, and what the target argument means. The absence of an output schema is adequately covered by the explicit 'name + description' return description.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the single 'target' parameter. It does so by explaining that target is a 'Monitoring target name from config' and that omitting it uses the default. This adds useful meaning beyond the bare schema property.

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 opens with a specific verb-plus-resource: 'List the canned-SWQL library (name + description).' It also differentiates itself from swql_canned by explaining that library entries are meant to be run with swql_canned, so an agent can tell this tool apart from its siblings without inspecting schemas.

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 gives clear usage context: these canned queries answer common SWQL questions, and the user should 'run one with swql_canned instead of hand-writing the query.' It names the relevant alternative and the workflow, though it does not explicitly enumerate when-not-to-use cases or other exclusions.

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