vault_activity

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses that 'clear' deletes entries, which is a destructive action, and that it shows tool calls across sessions. However, it does not warn about the irreversibility of clear, whether filters apply to clear, or any authentication or rate-limit concerns. This leaves some behavioral gaps.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no filler. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 adequate for a tool with 7 parameters and no output schema, but it leaves important ambiguities. It does not clarify whether 'clear' respects the filter parameters or affects all entries, nor does it describe the output format for 'query' beyond mentioning timestamps and arguments. These gaps mean the description is not fully complete for an agent to invoke the tool confidently.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add meaningful semantics beyond the schema; it only restates the 'action' parameter ('query' and 'clear'). The schema already documents all parameters well, so no extra value is provided.

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 clearly states the tool queries or clears the activity log, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly focusing on activity logs, making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool (to view or clean activity logs) and even explains the two actions ('query' and 'clear'). While it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, the context is clear and no exclusions are needed given the unique purpose.

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