list_indexers

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explicitly notes that API keys and passwords are redacted, which is a valuable security-related behavioral detail. The verb 'List' also indicates a read-only operation, though auth requirements and potential failure modes are not addressed.

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 two short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the action and scope ('List configured indexers') and then adds relevant return-field and redaction details. Every sentence earns its place.

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 zero parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool. It identifies the target entity, names the important returned attributes, and discloses the redaction behavior. Nothing material is missing for correct invocation.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so schema description coverage is effectively 100% and there is no parameter semantics to clarify. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description adds no parameter information because none is needed.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('configured indexers'), and it enumerates the key fields returned: protocol, priority, search modes, and settings. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like test_indexers, which perform an action rather than listing configuration.

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 when to use this tool: when you need to see configured indexers and their settings. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives such as test_indexers, nor does it provide any exclusion criteria or alternative routing guidance.

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