analyze_workload_indexes

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the action ('analyze' and 'recommend') but omits whether this is read-only, requires permissions, or has side effects. The nature of recommendations (output format, how to apply them) is unclear.

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 a single concise sentence, which is good for front-loading. However, it is too brief for a tool with two parameters and no annotations, sacrificing necessary detail.

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 two unannotated parameters and missing output schema, the description fails to provide sufficient context. It doesn't explain how to interpret recommendations or behave for different method choices, leaving critical gaps.

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 0%, yet the description provides no explanation of the two parameters ('method' and 'max_index_size_mb'). The agent receives no help understanding what the enum values mean or how to set the size limit.

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 tool analyzes frequently executed queries and recommends indexes, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling analyze_query_indexes by implying workload-level analysis rather than per-query, but could be more explicit.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like analyze_query_indexes or get_top_queries. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or when not to use it.

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