knowledge_refresh_index

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions 'manually force refresh' but does not disclose whether the operation is destructive, idempotent, requires permissions, or what side effects occur (e.g., index regeneration).

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 a single short sentence, which is concise but likely too minimal for a complex operation. It lacks structure and could benefit from additional context without being verbose.

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 operation's complexity and the existence of sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the refresh process, impact on existing indexes, or expected return values, even though an output schema exists.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, such as format details or effect of the recursive flag.

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 specifies the verb 'refresh' and the resource 'knowledge index', providing a clear action and object. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like knowledge_index_directory or knowledge_drop_index, leaving ambiguity about the exact operation.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as knowledge_index_directory or whether prerequisites exist. The description lacks context for appropriate invocation.

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