vault_put

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose a key behavior: automatic deduplication (merging identical or highly similar content into existing records). However, it does not explain what happens during the merge, whether the operation is reversible, or what the return value looks like, leaving gaps for a write 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?

The description is a single sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose ('存入一条记忆记录') and then adds the deduplication behavior. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or unnecessary detail. This is an exemplary concise description.

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?

For a simple store operation with no output schema and no annotations, the description gives a basic understanding but lacks important context such as the exact behavior during a merge, effects on existing records, or return format. Given the tool's five parameters and write nature, a bit more detail about deduplication and what the agent should expect would improve completeness.

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%, so the input schema already documents all five parameters (body, tags, title, source, weight). The description does not add any parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema, such as how deduplication interacts with tags or weight. This meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 the specific verb '存入' (store/put) with the resource '记忆记录' (memory record), clearly indicating this tool stores a new record. It also mentions automatic deduplication, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like vault_ingest and vault_list. This is a clear and specific purpose statement.

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 any explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like vault_ingest or vault_take. It only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the name and sibling set. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are mentioned.

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