analyze_query_indexes

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals this is a safe read operation. The description adds the 'up to 10' query limit, which is a useful constraint, but does not disclose other behaviors such as the default analysis method ('dta'), the effect of 'max_index_size_mb', or potential latency. It adds minimal context beyond the annotations and purpose.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core purpose and a key constraint without unnecessary words. Every word earns its place, and no filler or redundancy exists.

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 output schema exists and the annotations mark it read-only, the description is adequate for an AI to understand the tool's basic function. It captures the input limit and the goal. Missing is a note on when to use this vs. analyze_workload_indexes, but that is a usage nuance rather than a completeness gap. Overall it is complete for a simple analysis tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents all parameters. The description does not add additional meaning for 'queries', 'method', or 'max_index_size_mb' beyond what the schema provides. Baseline of 3 applies because the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Analyze'), names the resource ('SQL queries'), and clearly states the output ('recommend optimal indexes'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'analyze_workload_indexes' by noting the input is a list of up to 10 queries rather than a workload.

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 implies usage for a bounded set of queries (up to 10) but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like 'analyze_workload_indexes' or 'explain_query'. There are no clear exclusions or alternative references, so guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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