hyperspace_rebuild_index

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says the operation happens on the server and returns status as JSON, but it does not disclose whether the rebuild is expensive, blocking, destructive, concurrent-safe, or permission-gated.

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 two short sentences with the core action front-loaded. Every sentence contributes directly to purpose or return type, with no padding.

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 one-parameter maintenance tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient for invocation: the required collection and JSON return are clear. However, it omits operational impact details that an agent would need before triggering an index rebuild.

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 100% description coverage and clearly documents the single `collection` parameter. The description adds only the phrase 'for a specific collection,' which does not go beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: rebuild and optimize the HNSW index for a collection. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from related maintenance tools such as hyperspace_vacuum.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like hyperspace_vacuum, nor does it state preconditions such as needing the collection to exist. The intended use is only implied by the tool name and the phrase 'Rebuild and optimize.'

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