mnemosyne_vault_list

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

Beyond the `readOnlyHint`, the description discloses important behavior: the token is what other tools consume, the `id` is a local path they do not take, and unconfigured vaults are flagged and refused until the user adds them. These are non-obvious operational details that materially affect correct use.

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 front-loaded with the core action and return shape, then adds usage and token-handling guidance without wasted prose. Every sentence contributes operational information.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining the return shape and does so by naming token, display name, memory count, and optional description. It also covers the key refusal behavior, leaving little missing for a read-only list tool.

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 zero parameters, so there are no input semantics to explain; the baseline is 4. The description does clarify how the returned token should be passed to other tools, but that is output-side guidance rather than input parameter semantics.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it lists memory vaults exposed by Mnemosyne OS. It also previews the returned fields and distinguishes the tool from the sibling tools by explaining that its token feeds their `vault` argument.

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?

It gives explicit triggering conditions: call it first when unsure which vault to target, or when the user names an unseen store. It also explains how to use the result with the other tools, which is exactly the routing guidance an agent needs.

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