Delimit Vault Snapshot

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that the call is gated by require_premium, invokes backends.vault_bridge.snapshot, and writes a snapshot record on the vault backend. This alerts the agent that the operation is state-changing despite destructiveHint=false, adding significant behavioral context the annotations alone do not provide.

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 well-structured with clear labeled sections: purpose, when to use, when not to use, sibling contrast, side effects, args, and returns. The most important information is front-loaded, and each section earns its place by adding actionable guidance rather than filler.

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 zero-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers all necessary context: what it does, when to use it, alternatives, side effects, and return shape. The output schema presumably details the snapshot structure, so the description's high-level 'Dict with snapshot data and next_steps' is sufficient.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the input schema confirms this with empty properties. The description explicitly states 'Args: None,' which is redundant with the schema but harmless. With 0 params, there is no parameter semantics burden, so the baseline 4 applies.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Capture a snapshot of vault state (Pro).' It distinguishes the tool from siblings by explicitly contrasting it with delimit_vault_health, which reports only up/down status, while this tool returns a structured snapshot. An agent can immediately tell what this tool does and how it differs from adjacent tools.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance ('before a risky vault edit, to have a rollback point') and when-not-to-use guidance with named alternatives ('searching content (use delimit_vault_search) or checking health only (delimit_vault_health)'). This leaves no ambiguity about tool selection.

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