explain_query

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states 'analyze' which implies a read-only, non-destructive action, but does not confirm this or mention any side effects, permissions, or rate limits. The agent cannot determine if the operation is safe without additional context.

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 sentence, which is concise but lacks essential details about parameters and usage. It front-loads the basic purpose, but does not earn its place by covering critical information. An adequate length given the tool's simplicity, but insufficient depth.

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?

Given the parameter count of 3, 0% schema coverage, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values (though an output schema exists) or parameter purposes. The agent lacks enough information to correctly invoke 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description does not mention any of the three parameters (query, analyze, verbose). It adds no meaning beyond the raw schema, resulting in no semantic value for the agent.

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 'Analyze SQL or TQL query execution plan,' which clearly identifies the tool's action (analyze) and target (execution plan). It distinguishes from sibling tools like execute_sql and execute_tql by focusing on plan analysis rather than execution. However, it does not explicitly contrast with these siblings, preventing a perfect score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks any 'when to use' or 'when not to use' context, leaving the agent to infer based on the tool name alone.

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