validate_index

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of transparency. While 'validate' implies a read-only operation, it does not explicitly state whether it modifies anything, whether it requires specific permissions, or what happens on failure. The description focuses on what is checked, not on the tool's side effects or outcomes.

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 that immediately states the purpose. It contains no filler and is appropriately sized for the tool's low complexity.

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?

Despite the tool's low complexity, the description is incomplete. Since there is no output schema, it should at least mention what the tool returns (e.g., pass/fail, error details, validation report) or how the result is communicated. It also omits behavioral details like side effects, making it insufficient for an agent to fully anticipate the tool's behavior.

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% because the only parameter 'mode' is fully described in the schema. The description repeats the mode options ('core or full mode') but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it provides no extra value here.

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 function: 'Validate that the prepared sqlite-backed index is present, version-compatible, and internally consistent.' It specifies the verb (validate), resource (sqlite-backed index), and scope (presence, version compatibility, consistency), which distinguishes it from siblings like 'repair_index' and 'index.'

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 use this tool versus alternatives like 'repair_index' or 'status.' It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., that the index must be prepared already) or typical use cases, leaving the decision of when to invoke it unclear.

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