Realtime HANA performance snapshot

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, covering the safety profile. The description adds value by listing exactly what indicators are included, giving the agent a concrete expectation of the snapshot contents. No contradictions with annotations.

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 one well-structured sentence with a colon and comma-separated list. It is front-loaded with the key phrase 'Live performance indicators' and lists all relevant metrics without unnecessary filler. The length is justified by the number of indicators covered.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description enumerates the categories of data returned, which gives the agent a clear idea of the snapshot's scope. For a read-only tool with one optional parameter, this is adequate. It could be improved by mentioning the output format, but it is not essential.

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 single parameter schema_name is fully described in the input schema, including its default behavior via HANA_SCHEMA env var. Schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add further parameter details. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 as a live performance snapshot and enumerates the specific metrics it covers (open transactions, top SQL plan cache queries, long connections, column-store delta sizes, blocked transactions). This distinguishes it from siblings like hana_get_expensive_queries and hana_memory_monitor, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 'Realtime performance snapshot' label implies usage for immediate performance overview, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over related tools such as hana_get_expensive_queries or hana_health_check. It provides context without exclusions or alternative suggestions.

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