vault_store

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

The description reveals the upsert behavior (create or update) which is a key behavioral trait. However, without annotations, it does not cover error conditions, permissions, or side effects. The burden is partially met but could be more thorough.

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 sentence that conveys the tool's core purpose and key behavior (upsert) without any filler or redundancy. Every word contributes meaning.

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 parameter count (4) and lack of output schema or annotations, the description provides the essential functionality but omits details about return values, success/error handling, and any prerequisites. It is adequate but minimal.

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 covers all parameters (100% coverage), so the base score is 3. The description adds context about the composite upsert key (provider, keyName, project), but does not substantially enhance understanding beyond the schema definitions.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: storing an API key in an encrypted vault, with an upsert behavior based on provider, keyName, and project. It distinguishes from sibling vault tools like vault_delete and vault_list, though not explicitly from vault_store_file.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as vault_store_file or vault_list. It lacks any 'when to use' or 'when not to use' direction.

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