mysql_index_suggestions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It details what the tool returns (exact ALTER TABLE SQL, composite variant, EXPLAIN guidance) and importantly notes a limitation: 'Does not verify whether the index already exists.' This is valuable behavioral context beyond the input schema.

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 sentences that efficiently cover function, usage, and a limitation. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no filler. 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?

For a simple 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It explains what the tool does, when to use it, what it returns (including composite variant and EXPLAIN guidance), and a key caveat (does not verify existing index). No critical information is missing.

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 already provides descriptions for both parameters ('MySQL table name' and 'Column name to index'), so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not add additional meaning about parameter formats, constraints, or relationships beyond the schema. Thus, it meets the baseline but doesn't elevate it.

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 tool's function: 'Generates the exact ALTER TABLE ADD INDEX SQL for a MySQL table column'. It includes specific deliverables (composite variant, EXPLAIN guidance) and differentiates from siblings by emphasizing MySQL. The verb 'generates' is specific and the resource is clearly identified.

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 explicitly states when to call it: 'Call this when the analyzer flags a missing MySQL index or full table scan finding.' This is a clear trigger condition, and the mention of MySQL implicitly distinguishes from Postgres or Mongo index tools in the sibling list. Though it doesn't name alternatives, the usage scenario is explicit.

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