mempalace_diary_reindex

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

The description adds context beyond annotations by noting 'from the configured source store for this tenant', which clarifies the data scope. However, it does not disclose side effects, permissions, or what happens to existing index rows. Annotations already cover idempotency and non-destructiveness, so this is acceptable but not rich.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the core operation and followed by usage triggers. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundancy.

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?

The description gives the purpose, scope (for tenant), and when to use it. With an output schema present and 8 fully described optional parameters, the description is complete enough for an agent to understand the tool's role. It does not explain the pagination/dry-run parameters, but those are covered in the 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with each parameter having a clear description (e.g., 'Optional room filter for selecting entries to reindex'). The tool description itself does not add any parameter-level information beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 and specifically states what the tool does: 'backfill or refresh diary semantic index rows' from the source store. The label 'Maintenance tool' distinguishes it from search/read/write siblings by focusing on index maintenance rather than data access.

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 explicitly says 'Use after diary-search changes, migrations, or metadata-index changes,' which provides clear context for when to invoke it. It does not name an alternative tool or give a 'when not to use', but the trigger conditions are specific and actionable.

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