getIndex
Retrieve index details for a specific schema and table, optionally filtering by index name.
Instructions
Get index(es).
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| schema | Yes | Schema | |
| table | Yes | Table | |
| index | No | Index |
Retrieve index details for a specific schema and table, optionally filtering by index name.
Get index(es).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| schema | Yes | Schema | |
| table | Yes | Table | |
| index | No | Index |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, required permissions, or side effects. The description carries the full burden and is insufficient.
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 extremely short (two words), but this brevity results in under-specification rather than conciseness. It lacks necessary detail.
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 lack of annotations, output schema, and the presence of three parameters, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain return values, behavior, or how it differs from similar tools.
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?
Although schema coverage is 100%, the parameter descriptions are minimal ('Schema', 'Table', 'Index'). The tool description does not add any meaning beyond what the schema already 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 'Get index(es)' specifies the verb and resource, but does not clarify whether it returns a single index or all indexes. It lacks differentiation from siblings like getColumn or getConstraint.
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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as deleteIndex or postIndex. There is no mention of prerequisites or context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/centia-io/mcp-server'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server