connect_onyx_docs

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

Description adds value beyond annotations by detailing document types, searchability outcome, recursive scanning, and runtime requirement. Annotations already indicate idempotent and non-destructive behavior; description provides operational context without contradiction.

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?

Three sentences with no redundancy: action, outcome, feature+prerequisite. Front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence is informative and concise.

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 no output schema, description explains that documents become searchable via other tools. Lacks details on success/failure indications or duplicate handling, but overall adequate for a straightforward indexing tool.

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% and description mostly restates schema info (doc_paths are absolute paths, doc_type enum values). Minimal new meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description specifies verb 'index', resource 'local research documents into Onyx RAG knowledge base', and lists supported file types (PDF, Markdown, JSON, TXT). It also connects to sibling tools (onyx_ask, onyx_search) and mentions recursive directory scanning, making the purpose highly specific and distinguishable.

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?

Description implies usage for indexing local documents into Onyx but does not explicitly state when not to use or contrast with alternatives like 'run_onyx_ingest'. It includes a prerequisite (Onyx running at ONYX_API_URL) but lacks when-to-use guidance.

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