refresh_tool_index

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the mechanical behavior (connecting, retrieving, indexing) but omits side effects like whether the old index is replaced, network dependency, or failure modes. Since it's a refresh operation, some mutating behavior is implied but not stated.

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?

Three short sentences with the heading as the core summary, followed by a one-line elaboration and a clear usage note. Every sentence earns its place, no redundancy.

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's simplicity (one optional param, output schema exists), the description covers purpose, usage timing, and basic behavior. It omits details about what happens during refresh, but the output schema likely provides return info. A slightly more explicit statement about side effects would make it a 5.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the mcp_name parameter clearly documented as optional and defaulting to all. The description does not add further parameter-specific details, but the schema fully handles semantics, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb and resource: 'Refresh the tool index for semantic search' with explicit action of connecting to MCP servers and retrieving tool lists. It distinguishes itself from siblings like search_tools or execute_mcp_tool by focusing on index maintenance.

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?

Provides explicit usage context: 'Use after adding new MCPs' and notes the index is auto-loaded on startup, which implies when manual refresh is unnecessary. Does not explicitly name alternatives but the context is clear.

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