cerebro_reindex

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

Adds value beyond schema by describing incremental nature and scoping via paths. With no annotations, this is helpful but lacks disclosure of prerequisites, performance impact, or whether it is safe to call repeatedly.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with action and scope. No redundant 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?

Tool is conceptually simple. Description covers purpose, incremental behavior, and optional scoping. Output schema exists but not described, yet the description is adequate for a reindex operation.

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?

Only parameter is paths, described as 'limit scope'. Schema coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. The mention adds minimal meaning but no details on format, allowed values, or recursion behavior.

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?

Description clearly states the tool refreshes the static index and lists what it refreshes (symbols, dependency edges, hashes). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on reindexing, though not explicitly differentiating from each sibling.

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?

Implies incremental processing (only changed/new/deleted files) and suggests using paths to limit scope. However, no explicit when-to-use or alternatives compared to siblings.

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