reindex

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the operation runs in the background and mentions monitoring and cancellation pathways, adding useful context. It does not elaborate on side effects like whether the index becomes unavailable, but the schema covers the 'clear_first' option.

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 exceptionally concise, consisting of three short sentences. It front-loads the purpose in the first sentence, then provides actionable follow-up guidance (monitor, cancel). Every sentence earns its place without unnecessary detail.

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?

The description adequately covers the start action, background execution, monitoring, and cancellation. For a tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, this is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it correctly. Minor gap: it does not mention potential impact on existing index availability during reindexing, but this is not critical.

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 100%, with both parameters 'force' and 'clear_first' clearly documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter-specific semantics, but this is not required given the high schema coverage. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Start a full reindex of the codebase.' This specifies the verb (start), resource (codebase), and scope (full reindex), distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'reindex_file' which implies a partial reindex.

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 directs the agent to use 'get_status' for monitoring and 'cancel_indexing' for aborting, providing clear operational context. However, it does not mention when to use an alternative like 'reindex_file' or when a full reindex is unnecessary, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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