Team Vector Index Stats

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and closed-world, covering the safety profile. The description adds a genuinely useful operational requirement, 'Requires TEAM_DB_PATH', which is not in any structured field. It does not discuss pagination or failure modes, but against rich annotations this is acceptable.

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?

One front-loaded sentence stating what is returned, followed by a prerequisite. No filler, though the parenthetical return-value list is partly redundant with the output schema.

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 output schema covers return values and annotations cover safety, so the core is complete. The omission of use_test_db leaves a real gap for a tool that offers a test-DB switch.

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 coverage is 0% and the single parameter use_test_db has no description in the schema. The description does not mention it at all, so the agent gets no hint about whether it can point the call at a test database.

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 names a specific verb (get statistics) and resource (team vector search index) and enumerates the payload (item count, model, dimensions). It implies differentiation from the non-team get_vector_index_stats via the 'team' scope, but never states it, so the sibling distinction is only implied.

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 on when to use this versus get_vector_index_stats, team_semantic_search, or team_rebuild_vector_index. The reader must infer usage from the name alone.

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