telys_build_ivf

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

Adds meaningful behavior beyond the annotations: the tool mutates indexes, fails when the collection does not exist, and requires the optional faiss dependency with remediation commands. The idempotentHint and destructiveHint annotations are consistent with the description, and the dependency behavior is valuable extra context.

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 compact and well-structured: purpose first, sibling differentiation second, parameter guidance third, and failure/dependency notes last. Every sentence adds value and none are redundant.

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?

Covers prerequisites, defaults, failure mode, and dependency installation, which is substantial for a maintenance tool with no output schema. It does not describe what the tool returns on success, but the core invocation context is complete enough for an agent to call 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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description mostly restates the schema defaults and behavior for min_rows and target_recall, while adding only that the required collection must exist. This is adequate but does not significantly deepen parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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 and resource: 'Build per-partition IVF indexes and calibrate nprobe to a recall floor' for approximate search. It also distinguishes itself from sibling maintenance tools by naming telys_compact and telys_tune with their differing purposes.

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?

Gives clear usage context: use for partitions that have outgrown exact scans, and identifies it as a maintenance sibling of telys_compact and telys_tune. It does not provide explicit 'use X instead' exclusion rules, but the context is specific enough to route an agent.

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