analyze_workload_indexes

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

The description is consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation and adds the non-obvious nuance that the tool 'recommends' indexes rather than applying them. However, it does not disclose potential runtime costs, permission requirements, or analysis scope beyond what the annotation already conveys.

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, efficient sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action ('Analyze frequently executed queries') and includes the key output ('recommend optimal indexes') without redundant phrasing.

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?

The tool is straightforward with an output schema and read-only annotation, but the description leaves important context unexplained: the difference between 'dta' and 'llm' methods, and how this differs from the similar sibling 'analyze_query_indexes'. This makes the definition minimally adequate but not fully self-sufficient for correct tool selection.

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 all three parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning about parameter semantics, such as what 'dta' versus 'llm' methods imply or how max_index_size_mb affects recommendations.

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 states a specific action ('Analyze frequently executed queries') and outcome ('recommend optimal indexes'), clearly identifying it as a workload-level index analysis tool. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling 'analyze_query_indexes', but the phrase 'frequently executed queries' implies a broader scope than a single-query tool.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus siblings such as 'analyze_query_indexes' or 'get_top_queries'. The description implies general index recommendation but does not state prerequisites, exclusions, or a decision procedure for selecting this tool.

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