list_indexed_repos

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent. Description adds that it searches for .deepwiki directories and returns index metadata, plus the note about no prior indexing needed. This provides behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 concise sentences: first states the action, second clarifies a key prerequisite. No unnecessary words.

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 simple discovery tool with one optional parameter and full annotations, the description covers purpose, search mechanism, and prerequisite. Lacks details on return metadata structure, but no output schema exists to require that.

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 100% and the description repeats the schema description verbatim ('Base directory to search for indexed repos (default: current directory)'), adding no new meaning beyond the structured field.

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 specific verb 'Discover' and resource 'indexed repositories under a given directory', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_index_status (single repo status) and index_repository (creation).

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?

Notes 'No prior indexing required', which informs agents they can use it even if no repos are yet indexed, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over siblings or provide exclusion criteria.

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