swql_query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the tool is read-only, SELECT-only, row-capped, validated, and returns a structured JSON object with a truncation flag. It also explains the meaning of truncated results and what to do about them, though it does not cover error behavior or authorization requirements.

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 well-structured with a brief summary line, a critical constraint, an exact return format, and a compact Arg list. Each sentence contributes necessary information and there is no filler. The read-only nature is front-loaded, which is important for safe tool selection.

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 flexible query tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential context: return shape, truncation semantics, parameter usage, and the row limit. It is missing examples and explicit error handling details, but the core information an agent needs to invoke the tool correctly is present.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate, and it does. Every parameter is explained: query is the SWQL SELECT statement, params are optional named parameters referenced as @name, target selects a SolarWinds target, and limit controls row count with a default. This goes well beyond the bare schema and gives an agent enough to construct valid calls.

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 states a specific verb and resource: "Run a validated read-only SWQL SELECT." It clearly marks the tool as read-only and SELECT-only, distinguishing it from the write-oriented sibling tools. The row-capped behavior is also stated up front, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly says when to use the tool (read-only SWQL SELECT queries) and when not to: "state changes go through the governed write tools." It also advises narrowing the query or raising the limit when truncated. It does not explicitly contrast with swql_library or swql_canned, but the core usage guidance is clear.

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