Search: rehydrate

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

Goes well beyond annotations by explaining that records are re-sent from the database to the index, existing entries are replaced, the operation runs in the background, may take a while on large entities, changes no data, and that omitting ENTITY requires admin rights. This is rich operational context despite readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false already being declared.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then scoping, behavior, use cases, and alternatives. Every sentence carries useful information without redundancy.

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?

With no output schema and only modest annotations, the description fully covers operational behavior, admin constraints, side effects, timing, and the sibling alternative needed to use or avoid the tool correctly.

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 schema already describes ENTITY and its omission. The description adds admin-only semantics for the omitted case, which is meaningful beyond the schema, though it does not add syntax or format details.

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 (rehydrate) and resource (search index), including scope behavior (entity vs all) and the direct sibling alternative (search_purge). An agent can distinguish it from search_query and search_purge without opening any 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?

Explicitly tells when to use it: when search_query misses records or after changing which fields are searchable. It names the alternative tool for clearing the index instead (search_purge) and notes the admin-only condition for omitting ENTITY.

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