Rebuild Entry Index

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully bears the burden. It discloses that the tool rebuilds an index from disk and does not modify entry bodies (non-destructive). It mentions the default for projectId ('normalized workdir'). However, it lacks details on possible side effects, error handling, or permission requirements.

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 two sentences long, front-loads the core purpose, and uses no unnecessary words. Every sentence serves a clear function: stating the action and providing usage guidance.

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 simplicity (one optional parameter) and the presence of an output schema (per context signals), the description covers the essential context: what it does, when to use it, and a parameter default. It could be slightly more complete by mentioning error conditions or the effect of an invalid projectId, but it is adequate for a focused rebuild tool.

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 100% with one parameter. The description adds value beyond the schema by stating 'defaults to normalized workdir,' which is not in the schema description. This gives the agent useful context not provided by the schema alone.

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 explicitly states 'Rebuilds entries/index.json from entry files on disk' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying the use case for index drift, which is unique among sibling tools like list-entries and get-slice.

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 clearly states when to use the tool: 'Use when list-entries or get-slice miss entries that exist as files (index drift).' It also provides an exclusion: 'Does not modify entry bodies,' helping the agent understand when not to use it or what alternatives might be needed.

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