codebook_build

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

No annotations provided. Description says 'Index' which could imply mutating the directory, but doesn't clarify if the index is persistent or temporary, or if any side effects occur. Lacks info on auth, rate limits, or destructive potential.

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, zero waste. First sentence states purpose and output; second gives usage guidance and parameter hints. Perfectly front-loaded and efficient.

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 low parameter count and no output schema, the description covers the tool's core behavior and return value. Could benefit from noting that this tool is a prerequisite for other codebook tools, but the sibling names provide indirect context.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds meaning: notes_dir is described as 'a local path' and glob 'picks files'. This clarifies the parameters beyond their titles, though more detail (e.g., supported glob patterns) could improve understanding.

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 indexes a local notes folder and returns codebook contents (id + title per note). This distinguishes it from siblings like codebook_analogy or codebook_query, which operate on already 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?

Explicitly says 'Run this first to see what's in a directory', providing clear when-to-use context. Does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the sibling tool names imply this is the initial setup tool.

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