Query Explainer Protocol

This skill bridges the gap between raw database optimizer output and human-readable performance tuning. It reads EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, BUFFERS) and translates the nodes and costs into concrete actions.

Core assumption: A developer should not need to be a DBA to understand why their query takes 3 seconds and what to do about it.

1. Plan Ingestion & Translation (Static vs Dynamic)

• Default (Static): Analyze based on user-provided EXPLAIN text/JSON outputs.
• Dynamic (On-Demand): Only connect to a live database to execute EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, BUFFERS) directly if the user explicitly authorizes it and provides the target query.
• When evaluating the plan structurally:
  • Cost vs Actual: Differentiate between planner estimates (cost=0.00..10.00) and reality (actual time=0.015..0.020).
  • Data Volume: Note discrepancies between rows=1000000 (estimated) and loops=1 actual rows fetched (this indicates bad statistics).

2. Identify Bottleneck Nodes

Highlight the most expensive parts of the query:

• 🐌 Sequential Scans (Seq Scan): Acceptable on tiny tables. Disastrous on millions of rows.
• 🐌 Nested Loops over many rows: Indicates missing indexes on the joined columns.
• 🐌 Filesort / External Merge Disk: The database ran out of work_mem and had to sort on disk. This is a critical performance killer.
• 🐌 High Disk I/O: Look for high shared read blocks compared to shared hit (buffers).

3. Human-Readable Output Generation

Provide an intuitive breakdown of the issue.

Required Outputs (Must write BOTH to docs/database-report/):

1. Human-Readable Markdown (docs/database-report/query-explainer-report.md)

### 📊 Plan Summary
- **Total Execution Time:** 2350.45 ms
- **Biggest Bottleneck:** `Seq Scan` on the `orders` table (took 2100 ms, 89% of the time).

### 🔍 What the Database Actually Did
1. It scanned **every single row** (1.5 million rows) in the `orders` table to find records where `status = 'pending'`.
2. It then joined these results with the `users` table. Because there was no index to help sort them, it had to sort them in memory (`Sort Method: external merge disk`).

### 💡 How to Fix It
**Action 1: Add a Missing Index**
The planner is begging for an index on `status`. Wait, run `index-advisor` to be sure, but here is a quick fix:
`CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY idx_orders_status ON orders(status) WHERE status = 'pending';`

**Action 2: Increase work_mem (Optional)**
If this is a data-warehouse query, the sort spilled to disk because it needed 45MB of memory but only had 4MB. Temporarily increasing `work_mem` for the session might help.

2. Machine-Readable JSON (docs/database-report/query-explainer-output.json)

{
  "skill": "query-explainer",
  "execution_time_ms": 2350.45,
  "bottlenecks": [
    {"type": "Seq Scan", "table": "orders", "cost_pct": 89, "reason": "Missing index on status"}
  ],
  "recommendations": [
    {"type": "ADD_INDEX", "sql": "CREATE INDEX ..."}
  ]
}

Guardrails

• Beware of Stats: Always check if row estimations wildly differ from actual rows. If so, recommend ANALYZE table_name; before blindly creating an index.
• Context matters: A Seq Scan is supposed to happen if the query requests 80% of the table. Don't recommend indexes for massive bulk exports.
• Integration: Forward complex index configurations to the index-advisor skill.