index_codebase

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the main effect (creating a searchable index) and the behavior of force_reindex ('Force complete reindexing even if already indexed'). However, it does not mention potential side effects, permissions, resource usage, or what happens to existing indexes besides the default skip implied by force_reindex.

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 well-structured with purpose, when-to-use, and parameters sections, and the most critical info is front-loaded. However, there is slight redundancy between 'Call this first before searching any new codebase' and 'Required prerequisite for search_codebase,' which say essentially the same thing.

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 tool with two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, when to use, and parameter semantics thoroughly. It lacks some contextual details like return values or side effects, but it is sufficient for selection and basic 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description compensates fully. It defines both parameters in detail: codebase_path requires an absolute path with examples of valid/invalid inputs and validation logic; force_reindex includes a description, default value, and when to use it. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema types.

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 purpose: 'Prepares a codebase for intelligent search by creating a searchable index.' It uses a specific verb ('prepares', 'creating') and resource ('codebase', 'searchable index'), and it distinguishes itself from siblings by being the 'Required prerequisite for search_codebase'.

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?

The description explicitly says when to use: 'Call this first before searching any new codebase' and 'Required prerequisite for search_codebase.' It does not mention when not to use or explicitly compare to alternative sibling tools, but the prerequisite framing provides clear guidance.

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