System

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry full burden. It mentions 'manage the server' implying potential destructive actions (e.g., reindex), but does not disclose side effects, permissions, or read-only status. Actions like 'status' and 'overview' are implied safe, but not confirmed.

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?

Description is a single sentence with a colon separating the domain from specifics. Straightforward, front-loaded, and no superfluous content.

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 the core actions but lacks details on return values, optional parameter scope (maxDepth only applies to overview), and behavioral specifics for reindex. Without output schema, more context would help an agent understand results.

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 50% (maxDepth gets a description). Description lists action enum values (status, reindex, overview), adding meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not explain the purpose or behavior of each action in detail, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the domain ('System administration') and lists specific actions: check status, get indexing info, vault structure overview, and manage the server. This distinguishes it from sibling tools (edit, vault, view, workflow) which focus on content operations.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Implicitly for admin tasks, but lacks when-not or alternative recommendations. Sibling differentiation is clear from context, but not directly stated.

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