Rebuild Memory Index

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

The description claims to 'rebuild the SQLite index,' which implies destructive write operations. However, annotations set destructiveHint=false, creating a direct contradiction. The description does not disclose any behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide.

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, efficient sentence. It is concise and front-loaded, but could benefit from breaking out the three actions for clarity.

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 zero parameters and an output schema, the description covers the basic actions. However, it omits important context such as side effects, prerequisites, or when not to use, leaving gaps for a tool that likely has significant behavioral implications.

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?

With zero parameters, the schema provides full coverage. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed. The baseline score of 4 reflects that the tool has no parameters to explain.

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 that the tool runs secret scan, validation, and rebuilds the SQLite index. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like memory.secret_scan or memory.maintenance_run, which perform overlapping actions.

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 alternatives. The description lacks context on prerequisites, when not to use, or references to sibling tools.

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