explain_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description does not state whether the query is executed, whether EXPLAIN ANALYZE behavior is included, what side effects may occur, or what the returned execution plan contains. For a database tool, this leaves important behavioral ambiguity.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to conveying the tool's purpose.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, so the description covers the basic call. However, the absence of annotations and lack of detail about the execution plan's nature or the behavior of the EXPLAIN operation leaves some context gaps for an agent that needs to interpret results correctly.

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 input schema covers the single 'sql' parameter with a direct description, and schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra semantic detail about supported SQL syntax, limits, or formatting beyond the schema.

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 identifies the action ('Get') and resource ('execution plan for a SQL query'), which distinguishes it from the sibling sql_query tool that likely executes the query and returns rows. It does not explicitly name the distinction from siblings, so it misses a 5.

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 the tool should be used when the agent needs an execution plan rather than query results, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus sql_query or other siblings. There are no exclusions or alternative suggestions, so usage guidance is only implicit.

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