top_sql

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It reveals the tool queries v$sql but does not disclose potential performance impact, required privileges, or return format (e.g., SQL text truncation). Minimal behavioral details beyond the core function.

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, front-loaded with purpose and a clear usage hint. No redundant information.

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 simple tool with 2 parameters and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks parameter explanations and behavioral context (e.g., whether results are sorted by elapsed time descending). The presence of an output schema partially compensates, but gaps remain.

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%, and the description does not explain the two parameters (window_minutes, limit). The text only vaguely references 'N minutes' without mapping to the parameter. No additional meaning beyond parameter names and defaults.

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 states the action ('Top SQL by elapsed time'), the source ('v$sql'), and the temporal scope ('within the last N minutes'). It also provides a specific use case ('what's been slow recently?'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like run_select or explain_plan.

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 explicitly mentions the tool is useful for investigating recent slow queries, providing clear context. However, it does not list when to avoid using it or explicitly name alternative tools for other scenarios.

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