get_top_queries

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses only the ordering metric (elapsed time) but says nothing about the time window the measurements cover, permissions required, whether the query is cheap or expensive to run, or the shape of the results.

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 purpose sentence is front-loaded and tight, and the Args block is minimal. The docstring scaffolding ('Args:') is slightly heavy for a single optional parameter but costs little space.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is the only source of behavioral detail, and it omits what the returned rows contain and over what period 'elapsed time' is measured. Adequate for the minimal parameter surface but leaves real gaps for an agent interpreting results.

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%, but there is only one parameter and the description explains it fully: 'limit (int, optional): Number of queries to return. Default is 10'. It adds the optionality and restates the default, though the schema already encodes type and default.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('slowest queries') plus the ranking criterion ('based on elapsed time'), so the agent knows it returns a ranked list. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings like explain_query or analyze_db_health that also touch query performance.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as explain_query for drilling into a specific slow query. The agent must infer the use case from the name alone.

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