analyze_db_health

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating safe read operation. Description adds value by detailing the specific checks performed, which is consistent with read-only behavior. No contradictions or additional behavioral concerns.

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?

Description is concise and well-structured with a clear introductory sentence followed by a bullet list of health checks. Every sentence provides useful information with no 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter), the description is complete. It lists all available checks and explains the default behavior. Since an output schema exists, returning values are not required in the description.

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% for the single parameter 'health_type'. Description goes beyond schema by explaining what each valid value (all, index, connection, etc.) actually checks, e.g., 'index - checks for invalid, duplicate, and bloated indexes'. This adds significant meaning.

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?

Description states 'Analyzes database health' and lists specific health checks (index, connection, vacuum, etc.), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like analyze_workload_indexes or analyze_query_indexes which focus on specific queries or workloads.

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?

Description explains that health checks can be specified individually or as a list, with default 'all'. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like analyze_workload_indexes or get_top_queries, though context implies general health assessment.

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