index_workspace

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects (e.g., mutation, overwriting), required permissions, or what 'allowed workspace' means. The phrase 'Index visible Codex task messages' is a high-level summary without behavioral detail.

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 sentence with no irrelevant words. It is front-loaded with the action verb 'Index' and clearly states the object and scope. This is appropriately concise.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, and the presence of three parameters with partial schema coverage, the description is too sparse to be complete. It does not explain expected outcomes, side effects, or usage context, leaving the agent without sufficient information for correct invocation.

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?

Input schema coverage is 67% (workspace and global_scope have descriptions), but the tool description itself adds no parameter-specific meaning. It does not explain 'force' or the conditions for 'global_scope.' The description merely echoes 'workspace' implicitly, failing to compensate for the undocumented parameter.

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 uses the verb 'Index' and identifies the resource as 'visible Codex task messages' for 'an allowed workspace,' which is a specific action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_history or list_pins, though not explicitly. Minor ambiguity remains about what 'index' entails, but it is not a tautology.

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. The description does not mention prerequisites, such as ensuring the workspace is allowed, or context like using this before search_history. It lacks any explicit or implicit usage direction beyond the basic action.

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