all_indices

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the resource name and does not disclose any behavioral traits: whether it's a read operation, what kind of data is returned, formatting, or any side effects. This is no more informative than the tool name itself.

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 extremely short but under-specified. It lacks an action verb and important context, so it is not effectively front-loaded. The brevity is not a positive trait when it omits essential meaning.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description should at least say 'returns all NSE indices' to be complete. Instead it is an incomplete noun phrase, leaving the agent unsure of the operation.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100% (empty schema). Per the baseline for 0 params, a score of 4 is appropriate; the description doesn't need to add parameter details, and it doesn't mislead.

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 'All NSE indices.' restates the tool name without an action verb, so it doesn't clearly state what the tool does (e.g., list, fetch). It offers some scope (NSE) but is essentially tautological and does not differentiate from sibling tools like index_list.

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 provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of use cases, exclusions, or context for when this tool is preferable.

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