explain_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It merely states 'Analyze query execution plan' without disclosing behavioral traits such as whether it is read-only, how it handles invalid queries, or what the analyze parameter does. The description is too minimal to inform an agent about side effects or constraints.

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 extremely concise at one sentence. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no extraneous words. Every word is justified.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the output represents, how the analyze flag affects behavior, or how this tool complements siblings like execute_sql. A more detailed description is needed for a tool with two parameters and zero sibling differentiation.

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 0% (no descriptions for parameters). The tool description does not compensate; it fails to explain what the 'query' and 'analyze' parameters mean. Agents cannot infer semantics from the description alone.

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 analyzes SQL or TQL query execution plans, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like execute_sql (runs queries) and describe_table (describes tables), making its 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., execute_sql vs explain_query). It lacks context about prerequisites, typical use cases, or situations where this tool is inappropriate.

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