reindex

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: default incremental behavior, the destructive nature of full=True ('discard existing index'), and the return format (JSON summary with counts). This meets the burden for a mutation tool.

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 concise with three focused sentences: first states purpose, second explains behavior, third details return format. No unnecessary information, earning its length.

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 low complexity (one parameter), presence of an output schema (not shown but referenced), and clear return format description, the description is complete. It covers all necessary behavioral and semantic aspects for agent decision-making.

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 input schema defines only one parameter 'full' with a default but no description. The tool description adds crucial meaning by explaining that setting full=True discards the existing index and rebuilds from scratch, providing context beyond the schema.

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 rebuilds the vector index for a knowledge bundle, using specific verbs ('Rebuild') and resource ('vector index'). It distinguishes from sibling tools that manage individual concepts or statistics, as none focus 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?

The description explains when to use incremental vs full reindex, providing clear context for both modes. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternative tools for related tasks, missing the high bar for explicit exclusions.

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