get_index_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral aspects. It mentions that the tool returns 'information or an error message', but does not disclose side effects (e.g., no mutation), auth requirements, or rate limits. Given the lack of annotations, this is insufficient.

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 short and front-loaded with the main purpose. The docstring style (Args, Returns) is clear but could be more concise by removing redundant formatting when the schema already exists.

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 simple retrieval tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the basic action and parameter. However, it lacks behavioral details and does not explain the return value format beyond 'str', which is minimal.

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 parameter 'index_name' has schema coverage 0%, but the description gives a clear explanation: 'The name of the index to retrieve information about.' This adds context beyond the schema's title and type, covering its purpose meaningfully.

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 the action ('Retrieve schema and information') and the resource ('specific Redis index'), and it references the underlying command 'FT.INFO'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_indexes' which returns list of indexes.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_indexes' or 'create_vector_index_hash'. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., index must exist) or context for usage.

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