embodied-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

catalog_index

Scans a directory tree, loads every dataset found, and upserts metadata into a SQLite catalog while skipping unchanged datasets for incremental indexing.

Instructions

Scan a directory tree, load every dataset found and upsert its metadata into a SQLite catalog. Incremental: unchanged datasets are skipped.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "root": "<root>",
      "db": "<db>"
    },
    "name": "catalog_index"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`db`	Yes	Catalog SQLite path
`root`	Yes
`force`	No
`validate`	No	Also store a health score
`max_depth`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-destructive write with no open-world access. The description adds real value by disclosing the incremental skip behavior and that metadata is upserted rather than replaced. It omits what the tool does with unreadable datasets, whether the SQLite file is created if missing, and how overwrites behave when a dataset changes.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences: the core action first, then the incremental qualifier. Nothing is wasted or back-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 5-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, this is under-specified: the meaning of 'force', the depth cutoff, whether a catalog file is created or must exist, and what happens on partially unreadable trees are all missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 40%, and the description does not compensate: 'force' and 'max_depth' (default 4) are never mentioned, and neither is the depth limit's effect on the scan. Only 'db' (via 'SQLite catalog') and 'root' (via 'directory tree') are implied, leaving the two behavior-altering flags undefined.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb chain and resource: scan a directory tree, load every dataset found, and upsert metadata into a SQLite catalog. This is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like catalog_search, catalog_stats, and detect_dataset.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The 'Incremental: unchanged datasets are skipped' clause implies when this tool is the right choice (repeat runs over a tree). However, it names no alternatives and gives no exclusions — nothing tells the agent when to prefer detect_dataset (single dataset) or validate_dataset over this bulk operation.

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