opensolr_index_info

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

The description explicitly states that credentials are intentionally not returned, which is a useful behavioral disclosure beyond the raw schema. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, and this single caveat is helpful but limited. It does not disclose whether the operation requires special permissions, whether it makes network calls to Solr, or what happens if the index does not exist.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. The primary purpose and key detail (credentials not returned) are front-loaded, and every word contributes meaningful information.

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 a simple single-parameter interface and an output schema, so the description does not need to detail return values. The description conveys the tool's purpose and a notable security caveat. However, the lack of parameter format explanation and the absence of any usage guidance relative to sibling tools leaves an agent with some uncertainty about how to invoke it correctly in context.

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 schema has one required parameter, 'index', but its description coverage is 0%, so the schema provides no meaning beyond the parameter name. The tool description also does not explain what format the index parameter should take (e.g., index name, ID, or URL). The description's mention of 'an index' adds minimal context, but the parameter semantics remain largely undocumented, leaving the agent to guess the parameter format.

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 clearly states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('connection details for an index'), including the specific details returned: Solr URL, version, environment. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that delete, search, create, or add documents, though it does not explicitly name an alternative for index listing or management.

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 for retrieving connection metadata for a single index, and the sibling list shows this is not a search or mutation tool. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this over opensolr_list_indexes, which likely provides index-level information while this provides connection details. The usage context is mostly implied rather than directly stated.

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