memo_reindex

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

Annotations set idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that only derived index state is written and markdown remains the source of truth, reinforcing safety and non-destructive nature. This adds context beyond annotations.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and every sentence adds value. No extraneous words.

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 simplicity, annotations, and existence of output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, parameter, and behavioral aspects completely.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description fully compensates by explaining the 'force' parameter: reprocesses records even if memo thinks they are current. This provides all necessary semantics.

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 searchable index from the markdown vault, with a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling tools, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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 advises use after hand-editing vault files or changing indexing behavior, providing clear context. It does not state when not to use, but the guidance is sufficient for this operation.

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