discover_refresh_index

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

The description uses 'Force-rebuild' which indicates a destructive operation (overwrites the index), but does not disclose any potential side effects, impact on system performance, or whether it is safe to run frequently. With no annotations provided, more behavioral detail would be beneficial.

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 efficiently conveys the action and its context. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Force-rebuild' and provides essential usage context, with no unnecessary words.

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?

For a simple tool with no parameters and an output schema (to explain return values), the description covers the core purpose and usage context. However, it could briefly mention if any preconditions or cautions apply (e.g., service interruption).

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?

The tool has zero parameters, and the input schema has 100% coverage. The description does not add parameter information (as none exist), but according to the rubric, 0 parameters grants a baseline of 4. The description does not detract from this.

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: 'Force-rebuild the search index' with a specific verb and resource. It also provides context ('run after dynamically adding tools at runtime'), which distinguishes it from other discover tools like discover_tool_search or discover_list_namespaces.

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 explicitly tells when to use the tool: after dynamically adding tools at runtime. This is a clear usage condition, and since no sibling tool performs a similar rebuild, there is no need to specify alternatives.

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