Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Elasticsearch MCP Server

Elasticsearch MCP Server

by jesee
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

es_index_document

Index a document into a specified Elasticsearch index, with an optional document ID or auto-generated if omitted.

Instructions

Index a document

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "index": "<index>",
      "document": "<document>"
    },
    "name": "es_index_document"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoDocument ID (optional, will be auto-generated if not provided)
indexYesIndex name
documentYesDocument content

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.2

TDQS

D1.7/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It fails to mention that indexing is a write operation, whether it overwrites on duplicate ID, authorization needs, or results. The single phrase provides no 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.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is only three words, which is under-specification rather than conciseness. It lacks essential information and does not justify its brevity with any added value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with 3 parameters (one nested object) and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It omits return value, required index existence, and other critical context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter details beyond what the schema already provides, but does not detract.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Index a document' essentially restates the function name without adding clarity. It does not specify the operation's scope (e.g., creating a new document) or differentiate from siblings like 'es_update_document'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites (e.g., index must exist), or when not to use it. The agent is left without contextual advice.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools