arango_create_index

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only says 'create an index', implying a write operation, but does not disclose idempotency, error handling (e.g., if index already exists), or performance implications. Minimal behavioral information.

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 a single sentence, efficient but not overly terse. It front-loads the action and resource. Slightly more structure (e.g., noting required params) could improve usability without adding length.

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 complexity (13 parameters, 2 required) and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks any context about return values, constraints (e.g., required collection and fields), or typical usage patterns. A more complete description would aid agent understanding.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description enumerates index types, which the schema also does via enum, adding minimal extra value. No other parameter semantics are added beyond what the schema provides.

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 action ('create an index') and the resource ('on a collection'), and enumerates the index types (persistent, hash, skiplist, ttl, fulltext, geo). This distinguishes it clearly from sibling tools like list or delete.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., when to use a different type of index, or when to choose arango_create_schema). No mention of prerequisites or typical use cases.

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