arango_explain_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It mentions returning execution plans and optional index suggestions, but does not explicitly state that the query is not executed (read-only operation). This ambiguity reduces transparency.

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 a single sentence that conveys the core functionality without unnecessary words. It is concise and well-structured.

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, the description should explain the return structure fully. It mentions execution plans and index suggestions but lacks detail on format or additional information. Given 5 parameters and only 1 required, the description could better note optional parameters and defaults.

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 20% (only 'database' has a description). The description adds no detail about parameters like 'query', 'bind_vars', or 'max_plans', though 'suggest_indexes' is implied by 'optional index suggestions'. Parameters are largely undocumented.

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's purpose: 'Explain an AQL query and return execution plans and optional index suggestions.' This distinguishes it clearly from siblings like arango_query (executes queries) and arango_query_profile (profiles execution).

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 understanding query performance via execution plans, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as before executing a query or for optimization.

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