mysql_explain

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully discloses that only single SELECT/SHOW statements are accepted and that stacked queries/DML are rejected, which is meaningful. However, it does not address side effects, error behavior, or any execution constraints beyond acceptance rules.

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 two short sentences with zero wasted words. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the rejection behavior is stated in a compact second sentence.

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 single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description adequately covers accepted input and rejection behavior. A concrete example or a note on expected error handling would improve completeness, but nothing essential is missing for correct selection and invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds real value by constraining the statement parameter to a single SELECT or SHOW and explicitly rejecting DML and stacked queries. Still, it lacks syntax details, examples, or clarification of trailing semicolons, so the gap is not fully closed.

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 states the specific verb 'EXPLAIN' and the exact resource scope: a single SELECT or SHOW statement. It also explicitly rejects stacked queries and DML, making the tool's purpose unambiguous and clearly distinct from the diagnostic read-only siblings.

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 when to use the tool: when an execution plan for a single SELECT or SHOW statement is needed. It provides exclusions by rejecting stacked queries and DML, but it does not name alternative tools or explicitly state when to prefer them.

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