rebuild_vector_index

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose side effects (e.g., whether previous embeddings are overwritten) and dependencies (e.g., configured embedding endpoint). It only states the action without addressing these, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

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 14-word sentence, concise and front-loaded with the action. However, it is too brief to be fully useful, missing important details that would justify 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 complexity (rebuilding a vector index) and the presence of two parameters, the description is insufficient. It does not explain scope, prerequisites, or when the operation is needed, leaving the agent underinformed despite the output schema.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the description does not mention either parameter ('limit', 'token'). The agent receives no guidance on what these parameters control or how to use them.

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 states 'Generate embeddings for reaction steps' which is a specific verb and resource. It adds context about using the configured embedding endpoint. However, it does not clarify if this constitutes a full rebuild or incremental update, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'get_vector_index_status' or 'semantic_search_reaction_steps'. There are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or alternatives mentioned.

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