search_vault

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry burden. It does not mention any side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. However, as a search tool, it is likely read-only and safe. A mention of read-only nature would improve transparency.

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?

Two sentences, no redundancy. The first sentence states purpose, the second adds usage context. Efficient and well-structured.

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 3 parameters, all described in schema, and no output schema, the description is sufficient. It provides the key context of separation from project documentation. Could mention return format but not critical.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds context on usage but does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond what schema already provides (limit, query, vault). Adequate but no added value for parameter understanding.

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 action (search), resource (knowledge base vaults), and distinguishes from project documentation by explicitly saying 'separate from project documentation', which helps differentiate from sibling tool search_project_docs.

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?

Tells when to use: for research notes, reference materials, curated knowledge bases. Implicitly says not to use for project documentation. Also mentions option to search all vaults by omitting vault parameter or using '*', providing clear context.

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