createTextIndex

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

Annotations declare this is a write (readOnlyHint=false) but non-destructive, so the remaining burden is light. The description adds real behavioral value beyond that: the index is built online and passes through a status lifecycle ("ready") before it is queryable, which the agent must know before expecting search results.

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?

Two dense sentences with zero filler; the core declaration semantics are front-loaded and the lifecycle/query follow-up is packed into the second sentence with useful parenthetical pointers.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and the description covers creation scope, async build status, and the tools that consume the index. It omits edge cases such as duplicate-name behavior or the default insertion path shaping the "all" name.

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%, documenting name defaulting, the "*" property wildcard, and the consistency enum, so the baseline is 3. The description restates the "*" wildcard but adds no syntax, naming, or consistency tradeoff detail beyond the schema.

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?

Names a specific verb ("Declare"), a precise resource ("keyword (BM25) text index"), and its exact scope ("one property of a label, or every string of it"). The BM25/keyword framing distinguishes it from the embedding-index sibling without opening a schema.

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?

Gives a clear operational sequence: the index is built online, its status becomes "ready" (checked via listTextIndexes), then it is queried with textSearch or as the text leg of vectorSearch. It lacks an explicit alternative clause (e.g., when to prefer createEmbeddingIndex instead).

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