Context Engine MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool removes state and clears caches (destructive behavior) and doesn't rebuild (a behavioral constraint), but lacks details on permissions needed, whether changes are reversible, or what happens to dependent operations. For a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 that front-loads the core action ('Remove saved index state and clear caches') and adds a crucial qualifier ('without rebuilding'). Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 the tool has 0 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It explains what the tool does but lacks context on effects, prerequisites, or return values. For a destructive operation, more completeness would be helpful, but it meets a basic threshold.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters, earning a baseline score of 4 for not adding unnecessary information beyond the schema.

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 action ('Remove', 'clear') and target resources ('saved index state', 'caches'), with a specific qualifier ('without rebuilding') that distinguishes it from potential rebuild operations. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'reindex_workspace' or 'index_workspace', which might involve similar index operations.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'without rebuilding', which hints at a distinction from rebuild operations, but doesn't name specific sibling tools (e.g., 'reindex_workspace') or clarify use cases like maintenance vs. resetting state.

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