index_library

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and delivers: incremental by mtime comparison, saves measurements/layers/weight, removes missing entries, and explains side-effects of purgar=true (cleans in place, slow, thins symbol tables). This is rich behavioral disclosure.

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 dense sentences with no wasted words; front-loads the main action. Slightly long but every clause adds information about purpose, timing, incremental behavior, or the purge mode.

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 the tool's complexity and lack of annotations, the description covers what it reindexes, when to run it, incremental behavior, and the purge option. An output schema exists, so return values are not needed. Minor gap: no mention of required permissions or more detailed side effects.

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?

The description explains 'purgar=true' explicitly and connects 'categoria' to reading the folder structure, but leaves 'forzar' undefined. With 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates but not fully for all three parameters.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Reindexa assets/library/ leyendo la CARPETA como categoria', clearly distinguishing from siblings like list_library or add_to_library. It also explains the incremental reindexing scope and what data is stored.

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 states when to run: 'despues de mover, agregar o borrar DWG a mano' (after manually moving/adding/deleting DWGs). It also contrasts the normal incremental mode with the slow one-time purge mode, giving clear usage context and when to use which.

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