List hidden chats

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes this as a safe read, so the description carries a lower bar. It usefully adds the vault-unlock precondition, but discloses nothing about pagination, result ordering, or what happens on a locked vault beyond the requirement, so the added behavioral context is thin.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the prerequisite; nothing is wasted. It is not quite a 5 because the returned-field parenthetical is only loosely tied to the stated purpose.

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?

With zero parameters and no output schema, the description's burden is light and it covers the core action plus unlock prerequisite. It still omits how results relate to or differ from the other list_* and read_hidden siblings, and says nothing about result volume or pagination, leaving an agent to guess in a crowded sibling set.

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 tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline is 4. The parenthetical field list is a small bonus that hints at output shape despite no output schema being present.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Lists everything in the vault') and names the returned fields (titles, sources, dates), which is enough for an agent to recognize a bulk read of hidden items. It does not distinguish itself from close siblings like read_hidden or list_sessions, and 'everything in the vault' is slightly broader than the name 'list_hidden', leaving a small ambiguity.

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 gives one precondition, 'Requires the vault to be unlocked', which is actionable guidance. However, it says nothing about when to choose this over read_hidden (single item) or list_sessions/list_browser_chats, so the agent must infer the selection criteria.

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