pg_vacuum_analyze

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

With no annotations, the description discloses a key behavioral trait (blocked by connection readOnly mode) and that it performs writes. However, it omits important side effects like locking, performance impact, or permission 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?

Two sentences: the first states purpose, the second adds a critical constraint. No fluff, front-loaded, and every sentence is necessary.

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 covers the core function and a constraint, but for a write operation with no output schema, it lacks details on success/failure, typical duration, and prerequisite permissions.

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%, and the description adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter. 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?

The description explicitly states the tool runs VACUUM ANALYZE on a table to clean dead tuples and update statistics. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like pg_query or pg_list_tables, which are read/query tools.

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 implies usage for maintenance but does not specify when to use versus alternatives like pg_table_stats or pg_refresh_materialized_view. No explicit guidance on preconditions or exclusions.

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