Clear the semantic script index

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), but the description adds real value: it clarifies this only clears a SERVER-SIDE embedding cache and does not touch the game or live scripts, and explains the active-client resolution with a no-op fallback. This goes meaningfully beyond the annotations.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and scope, then supporting detail. The trailing boilerplate ('Phase: observe; cost=low; idempotency=read-only... Safety: read-only... On failure: inspect tool-schema') partly repeats annotation data and is generic, but the overall structure is tight.

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 zero-param, no-output-schema tool whose annotations already carry the safety profile, the description supplies the missing pieces: cache-only scope, session-based client resolution, no-op behavior, and the intended follow-up effect. Sufficient for correct invocation.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description confirms the empty signature ('Signature: {}'), aligning with the schema and leaving no ambiguity about invocation.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Drop the cached semantic index') and scopes it precisely to 'THIS session's active client'. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like semantic-search-scripts, get-semantic-index-stats, and the generic cache-invalidate.

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?

Explicitly names the trigger ('force the next semantic-search-scripts call to re-harvest and re-embed from scratch, e.g. after the game's scripts changed') and the related sibling it affects. Lacks explicit when-not guidance, but the context for use is clear.

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