clear_project_index

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that indexed data is deleted while config remains, that the project can be re-indexed later, and the return type (confirmation with chunk count). However, it does not explicitly warn about irreversibility of the index deletion or side effects on active searches.

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 front-loaded with the main action and uses a compact Args/Returns structure. Every sentence adds value: purpose, non-destructive scope, parameter clarification, and expected return.

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 simple 1-parameter signature and existing output schema, the description adequately covers the operation, parameter, and return. It could be slightly more explicit about the impact on search availability, but overall it is complete for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 0%, so the description compensates by explaining the 'name' parameter as the project name and providing an example ('my_device_logs'). This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, which only lists the parameter as a string.

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 states a specific action ('Clear all indexed data for a project') and the scope ('all'). The phrase 'without removing it from config.yaml' clearly distinguishes this from remove_project, and the mention of re-indexing differentiates its intent.

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 provides clear context: use this when you want to clear indexed data but preserve project configuration. It implies a contrast with remove_project (which removes from config) but does not explicitly name the alternative or provide a when-not-to-use directive.

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