Slow queries

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

With readOnlyHint already covering safety, the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: sorting by slowness, recency, and association with the request. The only minor gap is that 'recent' is not precisely defined, but there is no contradiction with the annotations.

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, front-loaded with the core behavior and a useful follow-up instruction. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundancy.

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 read-only listing tool, the schema and annotations carry much of the burden, and the description covers sorting and request linkage. The slight ambiguity around the time window of 'recent' and the absence of an explicit output shape keep it from being fully complete.

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%, and both limit and minMs are already well documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-specific detail, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 exactly what it returns: recent database queries sorted slowest first, with the request that ran them. This clearly distinguishes it from request-centric siblings like recent_requests and recent_exceptions, so an agent can identify the right tool.

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 context for when to use this tool: to inspect slow database queries and then drill into the associated request via request_detail. It does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, but the workflow is evident enough to guide selection.

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