vault_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds context about the hybrid search mode, default namespace behavior, and the ability to search memories under a different namespace (e.g., after export). This adds value beyond annotations without contradicting them.

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 consists of two sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the main purpose (search method and scoping), and the second adds key nuance about namespace defaulting. Every sentence earns its place, and the length is appropriate for the tool's complexity.

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 has 9 parameters, 2 required, and no output schema, the description covers the main search action and namespace behavior. However, it lacks explanation of how 'scope', 'tags', 'min_confidence', and search modes interact, or what the result format looks like. With a richer schema already documenting these, the description falls short of fully preparing an agent for all use cases.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description provides additional meaning for the 'namespace' parameter, explaining its default behavior and use case. It also implicitly clarifies the 'search_mode' enum by mentioning hybrid vector+keyword. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema descriptions.

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 performs hybrid vector+keyword search on memories scoped to a namespace. It specifies the search method and scoping, but does not explicitly differentiate from the similar sibling 'memory_search' (which likely lacks namespace scoping). The verb 'search' and resource 'memories' are specific enough for an agent to understand the core functionality.

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 provides guidance on when to use the explicit namespace parameter vs the default (vault folder name), including an example scenario. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool in favor of alternatives like memory_search or memory_query, which would be helpful for an agent deciding between siblings.

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