List indexes

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

Annotations confirm readOnlyHint=true, and the description aligns by stating 'List' (read-only). The description goes beyond annotations by detailing the return structure (name, method, definition, partitioned) and providing an example, which adds behavioral context.

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 concise (two sentences plus an example), front-loads the core purpose, and efficiently communicates return format and usage. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 presence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers the return structure and usage. It provides enough context for an agent to understand what the tool does and what to expect, without missing essential details.

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 description only includes an example with 'schema' and 'table' but does not explain their meaning beyond the schema. With only 33% schema description coverage, the free-text description fails to add sufficient semantic value for the parameters, especially missing descriptions for 'table' and '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 action ('List the indexes') and the resource ('defined on a table'). It specifies the return fields (name, method, definition, partitioned) and provides an example, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 inspecting indexes but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'describe_table' or other list tools. No when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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