list_vault_risks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only status, required permissions, or side effects. The minimal description fails to inform about broader execution context.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with key purpose. No wasted words. Efficient and direct.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained. However, the description omits mention of key parameters (vault_path required, limit cap) and does not sufficiently differentiate from similar list tools given the large sibling set. Adequate but incomplete.

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 mentions 'optional entity and status filters,' which aligns with schema but adds no new detail beyond what the schema descriptions already provide. Other parameters (limit, vault_path, duckdb_path) are not addressed in the 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?

Description clearly states the tool lists dbt mart-backed risks with optional filters. It specifies the resource (risks) and scope (dbt mart-backed), but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling list tools like list_vault_decisions or list_vault_tasks.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies usage for listing risks but provides no exclusions or context for choosing among siblings.

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