orm_performance

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states the analysis goals but does not reveal whether this is a read-only operation, whether it requires connection details, whether it changes any state, or what the return format looks like.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the primary action and immediately lists specific outcomes. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose without unnecessary filler.

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 relatively specialized yet lacks output schema and annotations. The description does not explain what results are returned, whether the optional database_name is needed, or what assumptions are made about the environment. This is insufficient for an agent to confidently invoke and interpret the tool.

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 schema has one optional parameter (database_name) with 0% description coverage. The description does not mention this parameter or clarify its role in the analysis. The parameter name is somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no value 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 uses a specific verb ('Analyze') tied to a clear resource ('ORM query performance') and explicitly names the concrete outcomes: detecting N+1 problems and lazy loading issues. This distinguishes it well from sibling tools like general query analyzers or index-specific tools.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like orm_index_coverage, orm_performance_baseline, or explain_query. The description implies it is for ORM-specific performance issues but does not state exclusions or preferred scenarios.

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