Search Api Index Clear

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says nothing about whether the operation is destructive or reversible, whether the index configuration survives, whether the index must be reindexed afterward, or what permissions are required. The verb 'clear' implies data removal but leaves the consequences, the safe/unsafe profile, and the follow-up action entirely to inference.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no padding — but its brevity is under-specification rather than genuine conciseness. Every sentence that is present earns its place; there just aren't enough of them.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. But this is a state-mutating, no-annotation tool whose blast radius (data loss, need to reindex, config preservation) and sibling differentiation are not covered anywhere in the definition. For an operation whose name is ambiguous and whose annotations are absent, the description leaves critical context missing.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description adds no parameter information at all. The single required parameter index_id is undocumented in both places — its expected format (machine name vs. numeric ID) and where to obtain it are unknown. With only one parameter the gap is small, but a description that says nothing about it fails to compensate for the zero schema coverage.

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 names a verb ('Clear') and a resource ('Search API index'), so the general domain is clear. However, 'clear' is ambiguous — it could mean wiping indexed data while keeping the index config, or deleting the index entirely — and the description makes no attempt to distinguish this from the directly adjacent sibling search_api_index_reindex. An agent cannot confidently pick between the two without more information.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling set contains search_api_index_reindex, search_api_index_update, and the server-level enable/disable tools, and the description gives no condition that would select 'clear' over any of them. Usage must be inferred entirely from the name.

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