kb_reindex

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses incremental vs force behavior and the resource affected, but omits details like permissions, side effects (e.g., locking), or return values. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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 sentences front-load the main action and options. Every sentence provides essential information without redundancy. Efficient and well-structured.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the primary functionality and options. It lacks mention of output or prerequisites, but is largely complete given the tool's low complexity.

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 schema provides a clear description for the only parameter 'force'. The tool description adds context about default behavior ('incremental by default'), which enhances understanding beyond the schema alone. Schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3, plus extra context earns a 4.

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 tool scans sessions directory and indexes new/updated .db files, with specific verbs 'scan' and 'index'. It distinguishes incremental vs force rebuild but does not explicitly contrast with sibling like kb_index.

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 when to use force vs default incremental mode, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like kb_index or kb_prune. Usage context is more inferred than stated.

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