Queries Get Query Plan

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the valuable non-execution guarantee, but says nothing about permissions/context needed, whether arbitrary statement types are accepted, or failure behavior for invalid SQL.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, with the critical non-execution caveat appended. Zero filler.

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 single-parameter read-only tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description is nearly sufficient — return values need not be explained. Minor gaps remain around statement-type restrictions and error behavior, but nothing essential is missing.

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 0% for the single 'query' parameter, but the name is self-evident and the description makes clear it is a SQL query. No additional semantic detail (e.g., dialect limits, placeholder handling, multi-statement support) is provided.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Generate the EXPLAIN execution plan for a SQL query') with a clear constraint ('without executing it') that implicitly separates it from queries_query and queries_execute_dml. It does not name a sibling explicitly, so it falls just short of the top tier.

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 phrase 'without executing it' implies the usage scenario (inspecting a plan safely rather than running the query), but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative such as queries_query. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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