pp_index_build

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'upsert' implying modification, but omits details on whether it is destructive, idempotent, or requires specific permissions. No information about rate limits or side effects is given.

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 extremely concise, but the arrow notation is not standard and clarity is sacrificed. It lacks structure and meaningful sentences.

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 one optional parameter and an output schema, the description should provide more context about the tool's operation and output, but it is nearly absent. The references to sections (§9.3/§11) are unhelpful without further explanation.

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 0% and the description does not explain the single parameter 'run_id'. The parameter's purpose and expected values are completely undocumented.

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 indicates a pipeline of chunking, embedding, and upserting agent pages into a store, which outlines the main action. However, the arrow syntax is cryptic and may not be universally understood. It does not clearly distinguish from siblings like pp_index_rebuild, making the precise purpose somewhat ambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as pp_index_rebuild or pp_index_status. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or when not to use it.

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