Get Table Indexes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the SHOW INDEX equivalence and use case context, but does not disclose further behavioral traits like error conditions or performance implications. With annotations present, this is a baseline level of added 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 three short sentences: it front-loads the core purpose, adds a use-case statement, and then provides a sibling alternative. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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?

For a read-only, idempotent tool with a defined output schema and complete parameter documentation, the description covers all necessary context. It states what it returns, when to use it, and points to a sibling for related needs, making it sufficient for correct invocation.

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% for all three parameters, each already having descriptive text in the schema. The description provides no additional parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 it returns index definitions for a Magento table (SHOW INDEX), using a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like describe_table, which covers column-level details, leaving no ambiguity about what this tool does.

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?

It explicitly says the tool is useful for optimizing queries and understanding lookup paths, and it names an alternative (describe_table) for column-level details. This gives the agent a clear when-to-use and a specific case to delegate elsewhere.

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