find_unused_stored_procedures

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 states the outcome but does not disclose how 'unused' is determined (e.g., reliance on execution statistics) or potential caveats like the resetting of baselines after server restarts. This is a moderate transparency gap for a diagnostic tool.

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, 12-word sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. There is no redundant phrasing or filler, making it highly efficient.

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 low complexity, two optional parameters fully described in the schema, and no output schema, the description is sufficient for an agent to understand what the tool does and invoke it. It could mention the return format for extra clarity, but the purpose is self-evident enough to warrant a 4.

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?

Both parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the schema already documents meaning and defaults. The description does not add extra context beyond what the schema provides, thus the 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 uses a specific verb ('Find') with a clear resource ('stored procedures') and a precise filter ('not executed recently or never executed'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_stored_procedures, which would simply enumerate all procedures.

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 intended use case is clear: to identify stored procedures that may be candidates for cleanup or review based on lack of execution. There is no explicit when-not-to-use or alternative naming, but the context is evident from the description and sibling set.

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