Index status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the timing guidance and that it reports index freshness/changed paths, but it does not explicitly state read-only safety, side effects, permissions, or freshness semantics, leaving behavioral traits partly implicit.

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 sentences with no filler and usage guidance front-loaded after the return summary. The first sentence is a fragment, but the description avoids bloat.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the description is under-informative: it covers return content at a high level but omits repo_id semantics and safety/profile details. It is not complete enough for an agent to call without additional assumptions.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must define repo_id, but it never mentions the parameter. The single required parameter's meaning, format, and scope are left to inference from its name alone.

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 supplies the data returned (active snapshot metadata, changed paths since indexing) but never uses a clear verb and does not differentiate this status check from the graph-query siblings. An agent can infer it is a read, but the purpose is not stated as explicitly as a 'returns X' statement would be.

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?

It gives a clear trigger: run before relying on graph results. No when-not condition or alternative tool is named, so it stops short of a 5.

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