index_create_with_write_alias

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It indicates this is a creation/mutation operation but doesn't disclose important behavioral aspects like required permissions, whether this overwrites existing indices/aliases, error conditions, or what happens to existing data. The rollover precondition hint is useful context but insufficient for full transparency.

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 well-structured with purpose statement, parameter definitions, and example. Each section earns its place. It could be slightly more concise by combining some elements, but the information density is high with no wasted sentences.

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 4-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides good parameter documentation and usage context but lacks important behavioral details. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, error conditions, or system implications. The rollover precondition hint helps but doesn't fully address the complexity of the operation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by providing clear parameter documentation in Chinese: names, purposes, and format guidance (建议使用 name-000001 格式 - suggested format name-000001). It includes a concrete example showing how to use the tool with actual parameter values, adding significant value beyond the bare schema.

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 creates an index with a writable alias, specifying both the action (创建/creates) and the resource (带可写别名的索引/index with writable alias). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'index_create' by explicitly mentioning the writable alias functionality and rollover precondition context.

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 provides clear context about when to use this tool ('rollover 的前置条件' - precondition for rollover), which helps differentiate it from basic index creation. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives among the many sibling tools.

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