get_slowlog_patterns

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It explains the output format and persistence across rotations, but does not mention read-only nature, permissions, or side effects. This is adequate but not thorough.

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?

Two sentences with no extraneous content. The first sentence states the action and resource, the second adds valuable detail. Extremely efficient.

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?

The description explains the output (frequency, avg duration, examples) sufficiently given no output schema. It could elaborate on the grouping key and how limit affects results, but overall it is quite complete for a tool with simple parameters and clear output.

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 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters. The tool description does not add additional context beyond the schema, which is sufficient given the high coverage. No units or constraints are specified, but it's acceptable.

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 the tool retrieves analyzed slowlog patterns, distinguishing it from raw slowlog tools like get_slowlog. It specifies the grouping by normalized pattern and the output fields, leaving no ambiguity about purpose.

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 mentions the persistence and historical scope ('survives slowlog buffer rotation', 'data goes back as far as BetterDB has been running'), implying it's for historical analysis. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_slowlog or get_commandlog_patterns.

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