bookshelf_update_indexer

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

The description explicitly warns 'WRITE: this modifies your Bookshelf instance,' which reinforces the readOnlyHint=false annotation and adds a side-effect warning. However, it does not disclose other behavioral details like whether changes are reversible or what the response contains. The mention of 'Query params: forceSave' hints at a forced save option but is vague and potentially misleading given the schema uses 'force_save'.

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 very short and front-loaded with the purpose. However, the second sentence is a fragment ('Query params: forceSave') and the text feels disjointed, with three separate ideas. Still, no words are wasted, so it earns a high score for conciseness.

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 that the schema has zero parameter descriptions, the tool has a nested body object, and it's an update operation, the description fails to provide essential context. It does not explain what updating an indexer entails, what the 'body' should contain, what force_save does, or how this tool differs from related update tools. The output schema exists but is not shown, so the description must carry the burden, and it does not.

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 schema has no descriptions, and the description only mentions 'Query params: forceSave' but uses a different naming convention than the schema's 'force_save' (camelCase vs snake_case), which could lead an agent to send an incorrect parameter name. The required 'id' parameter and the 'body' object (which has additionalProperties: true) are not explained at all, leaving the agent without essential information to construct a valid request.

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 function as 'Update indexer' with the verb and resource, distinguishing it from create/delete/get indexer tools. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from related tools like bulk_update_indexer or update_config_indexer, and it lacks detail that the update is for a specific indexer by ID.

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 such as bulk_update_indexer or update_config_indexer. There is no mention of required prerequisites or context, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name.

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