list_indexes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond listing, such as read-only nature, no side effects, or authorization requirements. For a listing tool, this is insufficient; it should explicitly state it does not modify data.

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 moderately concise but includes extraneous details about object store and object IDs that are peripheral to the core listing function. It could be tighter by separating fundamental behavior from output handling guidance.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers listing functionality and pagination adequately. However, it lacks information on error conditions, authentication, and workspace configuration requirements. It is minimally complete but has gaps.

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?

The input schema has one parameter 'after' with only type information. The description adds significant meaning by explaining it is a cursor for pagination and that the response contains 'next_cursor' if more results exist. This goes beyond the schema, earning a high score.

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 retrieves a list of all indexes in the currently configured workspace. The verb 'retrieves' and resource 'indexes' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'create_index' (creation) and 'get_index' (single index retrieval).

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 explains pagination via the 'after' parameter but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_index' or 'search_docs'. The context of listing all indexes is implied but not stated as a distinct use case.

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