memo_reindex

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

The description states 'Writes only derived index state; markdown remains the source of truth,' which aligns with non-destructive and idempotent annotations. It adds behavioral context beyond the annotations by reinforcing that the markdown is unchanged.

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 sentences, front-loading the main purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 simple tool with one parameter and existing output schema annotations, the description covers purpose, usage, and parameter details comprehensively. No gaps remain.

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 description adds a clear explanation of the force parameter: 'reprocesses records even if memo thinks they are current,' which complements the schema's description. With 100% schema coverage, the parameter semantics are well-supported.

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 verb 'Rebuild', the resource 'memo's searchable index', and the source 'markdown vault'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like memo_list or memo_get by focusing on index rebuilding.

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 explicitly says 'Use after hand-editing vault files or changing indexing behavior,' providing clear guidance on when to invoke the tool. It does not mention when not to use it, but the context is sufficient.

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