opensearch_list_index_patterns

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. It states the tool is read-like, returns specific fields, and requires Dashboards backend. However, it omits behavior if backend is down (e.g., empty result vs error) and does not explicitly label as read-only, but it is sufficiently transparent for its simplicity.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose and alternative, no wasted words. Each 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?

Tool is simple (0 parameters, output schema exists). Description covers purpose, use case, return fields, and dependency. No gaps given the context.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters (100% coverage trivially). Baseline for 0 params is 4. No parameter information needed; description focuses on output and usage, which is appropriate.

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 it is a 'Dashboards-only alternative to opensearch_list_indices' that 'returns id, title, and time field name for each index pattern'. It uses specific verbs and resource (list index patterns) and distinguishes from sibling opensearch_list_indices.

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?

Explicitly says when to use: when '_cat/indices access is blocked'. Also mentions prerequisite: 'Requires the Dashboards backend to be active'. This clearly distinguishes from alternatives.

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