workspace_index

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that the tool indexes files and creates/updates a local SQLite database. This is clear about the side effect (database creation). However, it does not mention potential performance impact or error handling, so a 4 is appropriate.

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 concise sentences that front-load the action. Every word contributes meaning. No redundancy or filler.

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?

Given zero parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately explains purpose and outcome. It mentions the database creation and its purpose, which is complete for a tool of this complexity.

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?

There are zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100% trivially. The description adds no parameter info because none exists. A baseline of 4 is reasonable as the description is fine but not exceptional.

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 it indexes all text and code files to create/update a SQLite FTS5 database for offline searching. The verb 'indexes' and resource 'text and code files' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like workspace_search (which uses the index) and file read/write (which modify files).

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. It implies use before workspace_search, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or prerequisites like workspace existence. A 3 is adequate for a simple tool but leaves room for improvement.

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