list_vaults

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose an important behavioral trait—only vaults 'accessible to the current authenticated user' are returned—and 'List' implies a read-only operation. It does not mention result shape, pagination, or whether shared/archived vaults are included, but for a simple list tool the inherent semantics cover much of the burden.

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 a single efficient sentence. The key verb and resource appear immediately, and the scoping phrase 'accessible to the current authenticated user' is relevant and earns its place.

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 one-parameter list operation with no output schema, the description is nearly complete. The input schema covers the only parameter, and the verb 'List' implies an array of vaults is returned. It could add detail about what vault metadata is included, but nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

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%; the only parameter, output, has an enum ('json'/'human') and its own description ('Output format'). The tool description itself adds no extra parameter detail, so the baseline of 3 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 uses a specific verb and resource—'List vaults'—and scopes them to 'the current authenticated user.' This clearly separates it from sibling tools like create_vault, delete_vault, or list_items, and the meaning is unambiguous without needing to inspect the schema.

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 implies the obvious use case: enumerate vaults the current user can access. However, it offers no explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as list_items, list_shares, or list_invites, and it gives no exclusions. This is adequate but not prescriptive.

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