mimir_vault_import

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

Annotations already mark the tool as destructive (destructiveHint: true). The description adds important behavioral context: idempotency (re-running doesn't duplicate) and the specific processing of frontmatter and body. This goes beyond the annotation and provides reassurance and clarity.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose and adds essential details in the second sentence. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, clear operation), the description covers purpose, idempotency, pairing, and what is read. An output schema exists (not shown but present), so return values are covered elsewhere. It is complete enough for the agent to use effectively.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with a clear description for the only parameter 'vault_dir'. The tool description does not add additional parameter-specific details beyond the schema. Since schema coverage is high, the baseline is 3, and the description does not need to compensate.

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 purpose: importing .md files from a vault directory into the database. It specifies the file type (.md), what it reads (YAML frontmatter and markdown body), and distinguishes itself from the sibling mimir_vault_export by naming it. The verb is specific and the resource is well-defined.

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 explicitly mentions idempotency, telling the agent it is safe to re-run. It also pairs the tool with mimir_vault_export for transfer, providing a usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives among the many siblings, but the pairing note is helpful.

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