delete_index

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It transparently states that the action removes both the index and its cached raw files, which is helpful. However, it omits behavioral details such as permissions required, irreversibility, or any side effects (e.g., impact on dependent tools), limiting its transparency.

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 a single sentence of 8 words, with no filler. Every word is informative, and it is effectively front-loaded for quick comprehension.

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 low-complexity tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully conveys the action and affected resources. It is slightly lacking in detail about reversibility or prerequisites, but overall sufficient.

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 covers the only parameter 'repo' with a clear description. The tool description adds no further semantic value beyond the schema, so at schema coverage 100%, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Remove a repo index and its cached raw files' uses a clear verb 'Remove' and specifies the resource 'repo index' along with its cached files. It distinguishes from siblings like 'doc_index_repo' (create) and 'verify_index', making its purpose 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 implies use for deletion but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., no mention of 'Use this when you need to clean up an index' or warnings about irreversible actions). No exclusions or alternative tools are suggested, leaving the agent to infer context.

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