validate_index

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

With no annotations, the description provides useful behavioral context: output is automatically stored as an object that can be referenced elsewhere, and parameters accept object references. It does not discuss side effects, but validation is generally safe and non-destructive.

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, with a clear structure including a brief summary, parameter note, examples, and output behavior. It could be slightly more compact, but all sentences serve a purpose.

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 a single parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: input format (direct or reference), output storage, and reusability. It does not specify YAML constraints but is otherwise complete.

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 schema has 0% coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains that the yaml_configuration parameter can be a direct value or an object reference (e.g., '@obj_id'), and provides examples of valid calls, adding meaning beyond the bare type 'string'.

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 that the tool validates index YAML configurations against the deepset API, using a specific verb and resource. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like validate_pipeline (which validates pipelines) and create_index (which creates indexes).

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 the tool is for validation before creation, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like validate_pipeline. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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