Search index status

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

The description adds specific details about the output (indexed vs. total issues, last sync timestamp) beyond the annotations which only indicate safe, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. However, it does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as latency or data freshness.

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?

The description is a single sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the key information about what the tool returns. Every word is necessary and there is no wasted 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?

Given the tool is simple with no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does and what it returns. It mentions all relevant outputs (indexed/total issues, last sync timestamp), making it complete for an AI agent to understand the tool's purpose and result.

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 tool has zero parameters, so no parameter documentation is needed. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description does not add anything about parameters because none exist.

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 the tool returns the fill level of the semantic index with specific metrics (indexed vs. total issues, last sync timestamp). It distinguishes from sibling tools like mantis_rebuild_search_index which performs a different action, and all other siblings are unrelated to index 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?

The description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it is clear from context that this is for checking index status, no guidance on when to use it before searching or other activities is provided.

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