Rebuild Local FTS Index

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

Description claims to 'Clear the local FTS5 index' which is destructive, but annotations set destructiveHint=false. This is a direct contradiction. Annotations and description are inconsistent, misleading the agent about side effects.

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 action and resource, no redundant information. Each sentence adds value: purpose, usage guidance, output.

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 simple input (one optional param), output schema exists (implied return value), and description covers purpose, usage, and result. No gaps for this tool's 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with one optional parameter (account_id) already well-described in schema. Description does not add new parameter meaning beyond what schema provides, meeting baseline.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Clear and rebuild' and identifies resource 'local FTS5 index' with scope 'from messages cached (INBOX + Sent)', clearly distinguishing from siblings like fts_search and fts_status.

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?

Description explicitly states when to use: 'after major mailbox changes or when fts_search returns stale results'. Does not mention alternatives or when not to use, but context is clear for typical scenarios.

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