reindex_knowledge_base

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses incremental behavior and the configuration source, but does not mention side effects, permissions, idempotency, or failure behavior for a mutating maintenance operation.

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?

Two short, information-dense sentences with no filler. The key facts—what is reindexed, incremental mode, and change-based processing—are presented clearly and front-loaded.

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 zero-parameter reindexing tool, the description is largely complete: it states the target folders, the config source, and the incremental behavior. A note about when to trigger it or what side effects occur would be nice, but nothing essential is missing for invoking it.

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 100% schema coverage, so there are no parameter details to document. The description adds useful context by identifying kb.toml as the source of what gets reindexed.

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 names a specific action ('Re-indexa'), a concrete resource ('las carpetas configuradas en kb.toml'), and a mode ('incremental'), which makes the tool's role immediately clear. It is easily distinguished from sibling query tools like search_knowledge_base and ask_knowledge_base.

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 conveys that this tool is meant for refreshing the index after changes, since it only processes what changed since the last run. It does not explicitly name search/ask as alternatives, but the maintenance-vs-query distinction is strongly implied.

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