detect_query_bottlenecks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It adds one genuinely useful behavioral trait — a prompt-injection warning that returned values are untrusted — but omits whether the tool is read-only, whether it is expensive to run against a live server, and what the results represent.

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, front-loaded with purpose and followed by the safety caveat; nothing is padded. Slightly under-sized for the amount of ambiguity around its relationship to sibling analysis tools.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves the return shape and operational characteristics unspecified. Given a crowded sibling set of performance tools, the minimal description is adequate but not sufficient to fully orient an agent.

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 100%, and all three parameters (limit, database, severity_filter) are documented in the schema including the enum values and default. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('detect and analyze') and resource ('query bottlenecks in the database'), which is more than a tautology. However, it does not distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as analyze_query_performance, get_query_performance, or explain_query, leaving the agent to guess which analysis tool applies.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives among the closely related performance siblings. An agent has no basis for choosing this over analyze_query_performance or get_query_performance.

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