transkribus_search_reset_indexReset a Transkribus search index to clear stale data and restore accurate query results. Optionally target a specific collection, document, or page.
Reset the search index, optionally for a specific collection.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | No | Document ID | |
| collId | No | Collection ID to reset index for | |
| pageId | No | Page ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds little behavioral insight. It does not explain potential side effects (e.g., index downtime, impact on searches) or what happens when different parameter combinations are used.
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, concise but lacking important details like parameter interaction, return behavior, and usage context. It sacrifices completeness for brevity.
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?
No output schema, so description should clarify return values or confirmation. Missing explanation of what resetting entails for different parameter combinations (all index vs. specific scope). Overall insufficient for an AI agent to confidently invoke.
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?
Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for each parameter. The description only references collection, not clarifying how collId, id, and pageId interact (e.g., independent filters or hierarchical). Baseline is adequate but no added value.
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 action (reset) and resource (search index), and mentions optional collection filtering. However, it does not specify that parameters for document ID and page ID are also available, leaving the scope partially ambiguous.
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 on when to use this tool versus other search-related tools (e.g., transkribus_search_fulltext, transkribus_search_keyword). The description lacks context for when a reset is appropriate and what distinguishes it from sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.