Find Missing Indexes

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

The description lacks behavioral details. Since no annotations are present, the description should disclose whether the tool performs any destructive actions, requires specific permissions, or has side effects. It only mentions 'query execution patterns' without explaining what that entails. For a tool that likely reads data, 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 a single sentence that is concise and easy to parse. It avoids redundancy, but could be slightly expanded to include usage context without becoming verbose. It is appropriately front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 absence of an output schema, the description should clarify what the tool returns (e.g., a list of missing indexes with impact scores). It does not. Additionally, with three optional parameters, it does not provide typical usage examples or default behavior, leaving the agent uninformed.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what is in the input schema definitions. It does not explain how 'minImpact' is calculated or how 'schema' qualifies the search. Thus, no added value over 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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: identifying potentially missing indexes. It uses a specific verb 'identify' and resource 'missing indexes', and it is distinct from sibling tools like 'list_indexes' or 'analyze_index_usage'. However, it could be more precise about the methodology (e.g., 'based on query execution patterns' is generic).

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 its siblings. For example, there is no mention of prerequisites, recommended scenarios, or how this differs from 'analyze_index_usage'. The agent is left without context for appropriate invocation.

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