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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds only the scoping detail that the vault is found by rateManagerId, but does not disclose return format, possible error conditions, or any behavior beyond the basic read operation.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action, target, and key clearly, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

The description is minimally sufficient for invoking the tool: the required parameter is clear and annotations cover safety. However, there is no output schema, and the vague term 'details' leaves the response shape undefined, especially relative to many vault-related siblings that might return similar-looking data.

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 100%: rateManagerId is documented as 'Vault identifier' and params as optional raw JSON. The description reinforces that rateManagerId is the retrieval key, which adds a little relational meaning, but otherwise the schema already carries the parameter semantics.

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 uses a specific verb ('Show'), identifies the resource ('vault details'), and specifies the lookup key ('by rateManagerId'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like peer_vault_list or peer_vault_snapshots through the single-identifier retrieval semantics.

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 guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives, nor any mention of peer_vault_list or peer_market_explorer_vault as related options. The only implied usage is that a rateManagerId is needed, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context is provided.

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