Self-driving optimize (dry-run default)

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

The description extensively details behavioral traits beyond annotations: dry-run default, execution requiring --allow-writes, snapshot for undo, and risky actions only with aggressive=true. It also notes 'Local files only.' This adds significant context not captured by the sparse annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false).

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 concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds essential information (behavior, safety, constraints) without redundancy. It is well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's functionality: what actions it derives, default mode, execution requirements, risk levels, and file restrictions. It is complete enough for an agent to decide tool selection and invocation.

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?

Input schema covers all three parameters with basic descriptions. The description adds meaningful context: explains the interplay between apply and dry-run, mentions snapshot/rollback capability, and clarifies what aggressive enables (VACUUM, dropping indexes). This enhances understanding beyond schema alone.

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 as 'Self-driving DBA for a local SQLite database' that derives safe maintenance and optimization actions like ANALYZE, PRAGMA optimize, and missing foreign-key indexes. It distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., litescope_advise, litescope_check) by emphasizing automated derivation and execution of optimization actions.

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 explains the default dry-run behavior and how to enable execution (apply=true, aggressive=true for risky actions), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus its siblings or when not to use it. No direct comparison or exclusion criteria are provided.

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