index_codebase

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only mentions scanning and indexing files, but does not disclose whether the operation is destructive (e.g., overwrites existing index), its impact on system state, or any prerequisite conditions (e.g., workspace must be a directory).

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, clear sentence that conveys the core functionality and supported file types. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 (indexing codebases) and lack of output schema or annotations, the description omits important details such as the outcome (e.g., index storage location), performance implications, or how to verify indexing completion. The schema covers parameters well, but overall context is lacking.

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%, so parameters are well-documented. The description adds 'one or more workspace paths' which complements the schema's workspacePath and workspacePaths, but does not provide additional semantics beyond what the schema already explains.

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 it scans and indexes specific file types (JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Python) and accepts workspace paths. This differentiates it from sibling tools like search_symbols or get_file_symbols, which operate on the indexed data.

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 vs alternatives. The sibling tools serve different purposes (tree, dependencies, symbols, etc.), but the description does not explain that this tool should be called first to build an index before using the others.

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