Index a document for search

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

Annotations already disclose idempotence, non-destructiveness, and open-world behavior. The description adds real value beyond them by explaining chunking and the context-window rationale, though it doesn't address duplicate re-indexing or what happens when both url and path are supplied.

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 tight sentences with no filler; purpose comes first and the searchability rationale second. Nothing repeats the title or schema unnecessarily.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. However, with zero required parameters the description should clarify that at least one of url or path must be supplied and how they interact, which it leaves implicit.

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%, so all three parameters are already documented, including URL caching TTL and optional source label. The description only restates the local-file-or-URL choice at a high level and adds no syntax or precedence detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb (chunk/index) and resource (local file or URL into the knowledge base) and explicitly ties it to sibling mcptoon_kb_search, so an agent can distinguish it from the retrieval tools without opening a schema.

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 phrase 'so mcptoon_kb_search can find passages in it' gives a clear use context: index first, then search. No explicit when-not or alternative indexing paths are named, which keeps it just short of a 5.

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