Get top expensive queries

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only and non-destructive. The description adds useful behavioral details beyond annotations: it references the system view M_EXPENSIVE_STATEMENTS and indicates the result is ordered by duration, plus the MONITORING privilege requirement.

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 concise sentences deliver the core purpose and a key prerequisite without any filler. The most important information 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?

The description adequately covers the source, ordering, and privilege requirement. There is no output schema, but the tool is simple and the description gives enough context for an agent to invoke it appropriately. Minor gap: it does not mention what happens if the privilege is missing or the exact output shape.

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 fully documents the only parameter (limit) with its default and maximum values, so the description adds no additional parameter semantics. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since schema coverage is 100%.

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 tool's action ('Return'), the specific resource (M_EXPENSIVE_STATEMENTS), and the ordering ('by duration'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like hana_realtime_performance and hana_get_session_info.

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 states the required MONITORING privilege, providing clear context for when the tool can be used. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the privilege and targeted resource imply a specific diagnostic use case.

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