Postgres MCP Pro Plus

analyze_workload_indexes

Analyze frequently executed database queries to recommend optimal indexes for improved query performance and reduced execution time.

Instructions

Analyze frequently executed queries in the database and recommend optimal indexes

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "analyze_workload_indexes"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`max_index_size_mb`	No	Max index size in MB
`method`	No	Method to use for analysis	dta

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Dec 10, 2025

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of disclosure. It states the tool 'recommends' indexes but does not clarify whether it is read-only, what permissions are needed, or if it modifies the database. The output format or side effects are not mentioned.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the key action. However, it could be slightly more structured by including the output or usage hints.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the lack of output schema, the description does not explain what the recommendation looks like (e.g., list of indexes, DDL statements). The tool is moderately complex with sibling tools, but the description leaves gaps about the output and scope of analysis.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with both parameters having descriptions (method enum and max index size). The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'analyze' and 'recommend' along with the resource 'frequently executed queries' and 'optimal indexes'. It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'analyze_query_indexes' (which likely focuses on individual queries) and 'get_top_queries' (listing without recommendations).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for workload-level index analysis but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'analyze_query_indexes' or 'get_top_queries'. No when-not or exclusion conditions are mentioned.

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

Deploy Server