explain

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool does not execute the query, but this is contradicted by the analyze parameter, which uses EXPLAIN ANALYZE to actually run the query. The description is misleadingly absolute and does not disclose the execution side effect or production caution; that information is relegated to the parameter schema.

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 short sentences with no wasted words. The core output ('Show the query execution plan') is front-loaded, and the key non-execution property is stated immediately. The structure is tight and scannable.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the definition mostly covers what an agent needs: the operation and the safe default behavior. The analyze mode is documented in the schema, but the main description's unqualified 'Does not execute the query' introduces a completeness gap that would be better qualified with a caveat about analyze=true.

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%: both 'sql' and 'analyze' have descriptive comments, including the important execution consequence of 'analyze'. The main description adds no parameter-level detail, but the schema already handles parameter meaning, so a baseline 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 names a specific action and resource: shows the query execution plan using EXPLAIN. It also explicitly states 'Does not execute the query,' which distinguishes it from the sibling 'query' tool and makes the tool's role immediately clear.

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 clearly signals this is for inspecting execution plans, not for running queries. It doesn't explicitly name the alternative sibling, but the phrase 'Does not execute the query' effectively routes an agent away from tools that do execute. The analyze parameter also adds a conditional usage warning about production.

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