baasix_add_index

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing side effects, but it only states the action without mentioning durability, possible failure on duplicate values for unique indexes, blocking behavior, or reversibility. For a schema-mutating operation this is a notable gap.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the essential action with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized relative to the schema's existing parameter documentation.

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 schema fully documents the parameters, but with no output schema and no annotations, the description leaves behavioral and return expectations unstated. It is minimally adequate for invoking the tool, yet incomplete regarding outcomes and failure conditions.

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%, with both collection and indexDefinition already well described in the input schema, including nested fields like unique and nullsNotDistinct. The description adds no extra parameter meaning but does not need to because the schema carries the detail.

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 ('Add') and resource ('an index to a collection schema'), which clearly identifies the operation and distinguishes it from the inverse sibling baasix_remove_index. No ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 gives no guidance on when to add an index versus alternatives, or any context such as performance considerations or prerequisites. It does not mention the inverse sibling or when a unique/standard index should be chosen, leaving usage entirely to inference.

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