Meilisearch MCP Server

create-index

Create a new Meilisearch index with a unique identifier and optional primary key to organize searchable data.

Instructions

Create a new Meilisearch index

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`indexUid`	Yes	Unique identifier for the new index
`primaryKey`	No	Primary key for the index

Implementation Reference

src/tools/index-tools.ts:92-112 (registration)

Primary registration of the 'create-index' tool with MCP server, including Zod input schema validation and the inline asynchronous handler function that executes the tool logic by making a POST request to the Meilisearch '/indexes' API endpoint.

server.tool(
  'create-index',
  'Create a new Meilisearch index',
  {
    indexUid: z.string().describe('Unique identifier for the new index'),
    primaryKey: z.string().optional().describe('Primary key for the index'),
  },
  async ({ indexUid, primaryKey }: CreateIndexParams) => {
    try {
      const response = await apiClient.post('/indexes', {
        uid: indexUid,
        primaryKey,
      });
      return {
        content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(response.data, null, 2) }],
      };
    } catch (error) {
      return createErrorResponse(error);
    }
  }
);

src/tools/index-tools.ts:23-26 (schema)
TypeScript type definition for the parameters accepted by the 'create-index' tool handler.
```
interface CreateIndexParams {
  indexUid: string;
  primaryKey?: string;
}
```
src/index.ts:64-64 (registration)
Top-level registration call that invokes the index tools module registration, thereby making the 'create-index' tool available on the MCP server.
```
registerIndexTools(server);
```

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedDec 10, 2025

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states 'Create' which implies a write/mutation operation, but doesn't mention permissions needed, whether the operation is idempotent, error conditions (e.g., if index already exists), or what happens on success (e.g., returns index details). This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, clear sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any fluff or redundant information. It's perfectly front-loaded and wastes no words, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens after creation (e.g., returns index object, task ID), error handling, or behavioral constraints. Given the complexity of creating a database index and the lack of structured data, more context is needed for effective use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters clearly documented in the schema itself. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting without compensating with extra context.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Create') and resource ('Meilisearch index'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'update-index' or 'swap-indexes', which would require more specific context about when to create versus modify an index.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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. With siblings like 'update-index' and 'swap-indexes' available, there's no indication of prerequisites (e.g., whether an index must not exist already) or comparative use cases, leaving the agent to infer usage from context alone.

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

Deploy Server