Optimize query

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

The description adds context beyond annotations by explaining the method ('using EXPLAIN plan costs and index scans') and output nature ('returning an optimized version'). It aligns with readOnlyHint=true, indicating no destructive side effects.

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, dense sentence that conveys all necessary information without redundancy. Every phrase carries weight, and the main action is front-loaded.

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 tool with an output schema, the description adequately covers input, method, and output. However, it could mention limitations (e.g., only works for certain SQL dialects) or prerequisites, but overall it is sufficient.

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?

The description implicitly clarifies the 'sql' parameter's purpose (the query to analyze). The 'database' parameter already has a schema description. With 50% schema coverage, the tool description adds necessary context for the primary parameter.

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 verb ('Analyze' and 'returning') and resource ('SQL query'), and specifies the exact outcomes ('syntax anti-patterns and performance issues' and 'optimized version'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like analyze_query_plan by promising an optimized version, not just analysis.

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 implies usage for optimization but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives (e.g., explain_query or run_select_tuned). No when-not 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.