list_indexes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List indexes for a table or schema' only conveys a basic read operation without details on output format, whether both table and schema are required, or any side effects. No safety or prerequisite information is provided.

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 with no filler words. It is efficient and easy to scan, though it omits details that might be expected for clarity. Structure is good, but the brevity borders on under-specification.

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 has three parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, so the description must be richer to be complete. It does not explain return values, parameter semantics, or when to use with schema vs table. This is inadequate for guiding an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds the notion that indexes are listed 'for a table or schema', which hints at the roles of `table` and `schema`, but it does not clarify the relationship between these parameters or the purpose of `database_name`. This is insufficient for the three-parameter 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 'List indexes for a table or schema' clearly states the action (list) and the resource (indexes) with scope options (table or schema). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_objects and list_schemas, which target different resources.

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 when indexes need to be listed, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives such as index_dedup or orm_index_coverage. No exclusionary criteria or alternative tools are mentioned.

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