detect_n_plus_one

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. 'Detect' implies a read-only analysis, but the description does not disclose what thresholds or patterns are used, whether any state is changed, or what the output looks like.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and contains no filler, but it is minimal to the point of under-specifying a tool with 10 parameters and no output schema. It is concise but not especially informative.

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?

With 10 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description should explain the result format and prerequisites such as Clockwork connection or authentication. It only states the detection goal, leaving an agent to guess how the analysis is scoped and returned.

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 coverage is 100%, so all 10 parameters already have descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no meaningful parameter detail beyond the word 'request', which loosely maps to requestId or uri scoping.

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 names a specific action and resource: 'Detect N+1 query patterns in a request.' It is clear about what the tool does, but it does not differentiate it from siblings like analyze_slow_queries or get_queries.

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 the tool should be used when N+1 query detection is needed, but it does not state when to prefer it over alternatives or how to scope the analysis. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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