Enable External Vectors

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

The description notes a key behavioral trait—replacing text embedding with external vectors—but says nothing about side effects on existing data, whether the operation invalidates previously stored text embeddings, or what happens on repeated calls. Annotations are generic and do not fill this gap; no contradiction is present.

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 one sentence with no wasted words, front-loads the main action, and places the differentiator at the end. It is easily parseable and appropriately sized for an overview, though it trades off depth.

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 four parameters, no parameter descriptions, and no output schema, an agent still lacks prerequisites, expected outcomes, error behavior, and relationships to setup tools like montycat_create_keyspace or montycat_install_engine. This is not enough to invoke the tool confidently.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It only clarifies the role of 'keyspace'; 'dimensions' and 'embedding_space' are unexplained, and the optional 'store' parameter is entirely opaque.

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 a concrete verb ('Enroll'), names the affected resource ('keyspace'), and clarifies the intent ('caller-supplied embeddings instead of text embedding'). This clearly distinguishes the tool from a text-embedding flow and from related sibling tools like montycat_enable_semantic.

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 when to use it: when callers will supply embeddings rather than relying on text embedding. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, nor does it name alternatives such as montycat_enable_semantic or montycat_install_engine, leaving some selection reasoning to inference.

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