Показать план выполнения запроса

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description adds valuable extra context: normal mode does nothing, while analyze=true actually executes and can be expensive on large tables. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Three sentences with no redundancy: purpose, key behavioral caveat, and usage context are all front-loaded. Every sentence earns its place.

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 4-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is sufficient: it covers purpose, behavior, cost, and when to use. Minor gaps (e.g., exact return format) are covered by the schema, so nothing critical 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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics for the analyze parameter (explains it runs the query and is costly), enriching understanding beyond the schema's simple boolean description.

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 returns an execution plan for read queries, specifying what it shows (indexes and row estimates). It distinguishes from siblings implicitly by focusing on planning rather than execution, but does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

Provides concrete guidance on when to use: before heavy selections and when diagnosing slow queries. No exclusions or alternative tool mentions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide between explain and query/execute.

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