create_index

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It omits potential side effects like table locking, performance impact during creation, or permission requirements. The return is only 'Status message' with no detail.

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 concise and includes structured Args/Returns sections. However, it could be slightly more streamlined; the Args section duplicates schema info but adds value. No wasted sentences.

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 tool's simplicity (3 params, no nested objects), the description covers basic usage. However, it lacks behavioral context (e.g., does it lock the table?) and the output schema is not shown but mentioned. Sibling tools suggest alternatives, but description doesn't guide selection.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by listing table_name, column_name, and index_name with brief explanations. It clarifies index_name's optionality and custom name role. Could mention default naming behavior but sufficient.

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 verb 'Create' and the resource 'index on a table column', with a specific purpose 'for better query performance'. It distinguishes from siblings like execute_sql_query (general SQL) and get_query_plan (plan analysis).

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 use for query performance but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_query_plan to analyze performance first). No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria.

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