get_vault_context

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. Description adds valuable behavioral details: cached on vault-mtime, safe to call repeatedly, and exclusion of auto-computed tags. No contradiction.

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?

Well-structured: opens with main purpose, then specifics, then usage hint, then exclusion detail. Each sentence adds value, though slightly verbose in listing all three context types.

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?

For a tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool returns, when to use it, caching behavior, and exclusions. No gaps.

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?

Only one parameter 'refresh' with boolean type; schema coverage is 100%, so schema already documents it. Description mentions force re-scan but adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema 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?

Clearly states it reads the vault's wikilinking context and lists three specific outputs: entity slugs, active slugs, and taxonomy. Differentiates from siblings by naming propose_compile_from_raw and explicitly excluding Region/X and vibrance/X tags.

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?

Explicitly instructs to call before propose_compile_from_raw, explaining why (real entity slugs and existing tags). Notes caching behavior and safety for repeated calls.

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