vault_health

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavior disclosure. It accurately conveys that this is a diagnostic, non-mutating health check and explains that it differentiates configuration problems from real failures. It does not detail error behavior, but the zero-parameter scope and output schema reduce the need.

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 tight sentences, front-loads the core purpose, and adds a practical usage directive without any wasted words. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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 health-check tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it reports, when to call it, and how to interpret its diagnostic value. Nothing important is missing.

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?

There are no parameters to document, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed since the schema has an empty properties object.

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 ('Report') and resource ('the vault'), clearly stating that it checks whether the vault is configured and reachable. This makes the tool's purpose obvious and clearly distinguishes it from the note-oriented sibling 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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call this first when something is not working.' It also explains what the tool helps distinguish, which tells the agent how to interpret the result and when to look elsewhere for a genuine failure.

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