reindex_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond that: the index is never auto-refreshed by writes and the call returns a task_id to poll with get_task, which is essential operational knowledge for an async mutation.

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 purpose is front-loaded in sentence one, followed by the motivating failure mode and the return contract. Every sentence earns its place with zero filler.

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?

For a single-parameter async reindex with no output schema, the description covers what it does, when to use it, the downside of omission, and how to track completion via get_task. No authentication note, but nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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?

There is only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents 'full' completely. The description's mention of bulk imports loosely gestures at the full-rebuild case but adds no syntax or format meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Rebuild the full-text search index') and it explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling that reads the index ('search_text reads a stored index'). An agent can distinguish this from search_text without opening either schema.

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?

States exactly when to run it ('after a bulk import or a large editing session') and the consequence of skipping it ('searches will quietly miss everything added since the last build'), which is a real when/when-not trigger.

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