Rodev_vault_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation via 'Get details' and adds that deposit instructions are included, but it does not disclose return format, potential errors, or other behavioral details. This is a moderate gap for an info 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 concise sentence that immediately states the action and resource, includes a scoping detail (by vault or asset address), and highlights a valuable included item. No wasted words.

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 simple one-parameter design and no output schema, the description provides enough context: clear purpose, parameter meaning, and a notable content element. The return 'details' could be more specific, but the tool's complexity is low.

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 schema has only a parameter name 'vault_or_asset' with no description. The tool description compensates by stating the parameter accepts a vault or asset address, adding meaningful context beyond the schema.

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: getting details for a specific agent-token vault, identified by vault or asset address. It also notes a key included detail (how to deposit), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like Rodev_vault_status and Rodev_vault_balance.

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 makes it clear this tool is for looking up a specific vault's details, not for listing or status checks. However, it does not explicitly mention sibling alternatives or when not to use it, so it earns a 4 rather than 5.

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