jambavan_index

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool parses files, stores in SQLite, and returns statistics. It mentions incremental updates, which is good for an indexing tool. Lacks details on error handling or permissions, but acceptable.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. Every sentence adds value: purpose, method, usage pattern, return value. No superfluous text.

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 an indexing tool with no output schema, the description adequately describes return values (statistics). It doesn't discuss resumption or cancellation, but the context is complete enough for an agent to use effectively.

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% with a single optional parameter 'root', which is already well-documented in the schema. The tool description adds no additional semantics beyond the schema, meriting the baseline score of 3.

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 explicitly states 'Build or refresh the Jambavan codebase index', using a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like jambavan_awaken or jambavan_graph by focusing solely on indexing.

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?

Provides clear context: 'Run once per project, then incrementally on file changes.' This tells the agent when to invoke the tool. It does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, but the guidance is sufficient for typical use.

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