search_vault

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

Annotations are absent, so the description should fully disclose behavioral aspects. It merely states 'semantic search' – which implies a read operation but does not explicitly state side effects, resource constraints, or result handling. No details on output stability, rate limits, or side effects are given. Minimal transparency.

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, which is concise. However, it is under-specified: it lacks necessary detail for an agent to use the tool effectively. The brevity is not a virtue because it omits critical information, making it more of an under-specification than a well-structured concise entry.

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?

The tool has two parameters and an output schema, but the description gives no information about return format, pagination, or semantics. Since annotations are missing, the description must bear the burden of explaining expected behavior. It fails to provide enough context to use the tool safely, especially for a semantic search that could have variable behavior.

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 is the only source of parameter meaning. The description does not mention 'query' or 'k' at all. The schema lists 'k' with a default but no description, and 'query' without context. This is a complete failure to provide any parameter semantics in the description.

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 it performs 'semantic search' over the vault, which clearly identifies the action and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'related_notes' or 'expand_search' – the term 'semantic' hints at a method but not why this one is distinct. Purpose is clear but not enriched with scope or contrast.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the siblings. The description only states what it does, not when it is the right choice. There is no mention of use cases, exclusions, or alternative recommendations.

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