Vault Status

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already indicates no mutations. The description adds the valuable behavioral detail that the check is lazy and non-blocking, which is beyond what annotations provide. It also specifies the return information (locked/unlocked, server, user). No contradictions.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the core functionality, and the second adds an important caveat. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is complete. It mentions the key output fields and adds behavioral context. There are 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?

The tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter details. Following the baseline recommendation for 0 parameters, a score of 4 is appropriate.

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 clearly states that the tool returns Bitwarden CLI status (locked/unlocked, server, user). It uses a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('status'), which distinguishes it from the many sibling tools that perform mutations or retrievals of specific items.

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 context that this is a 'lazy check' and warns that a 'not-ready status does not mean later keychain tool calls cannot unlock or recover on demand.' This helps the agent avoid premature conclusions. While it doesn't explicitly list alternatives or when not to use, the sibling context makes its role clear.

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