vault_lint

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It clearly states that the tool finds dead links and orphan notes, which implies a read-only analysis. It does not explicitly say 'does not modify anything' or describe output format, but the verb 'check' and the specific findings are transparent enough for a zero-parameter tool.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the purpose and specifics without any waste. Every word earns its place, and the format is highly scannable.

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 zero-parameter tool with an output schema, the description provides sufficient context: it names the exact issues identified (dead wikilinks and orphan notes). The output schema presumably covers the return structure, so no additional information is necessary.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema already covers everything. The description adds no parameter-specific details, but with no parameters to explain, the schema coverage is complete. Baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description does not miss anything.

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's function with a specific verb ('Check vault health') and concrete outputs ('find dead [[wikilinks]] and orphan notes'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like vault_search (searching) and vault_backlinks (link analysis), 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 implies usage for health checking but does not explicitly mention when to use it vs alternatives or exclude other scenarios. While 'Check vault health' is clear context, there is no guidance on when to choose this over vault_search or vault_traverse, leaving the 'when' partially implicit.

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