vault_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It transparently states that the tool may initialize the vault directory structure if needed and returns a coverage index with detailed components. This is sufficient for understanding the tool's side effects and output.

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 concise with two functional sentences plus one conceptual sentence about the living exocortex. While the third sentence adds context, it could be considered slightly extraneous. Overall, it is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 zero parameters, an output schema that likely details the return structure, and a description that explains the purpose and behavior, the description is fully complete. It covers initialization side effects and the nature of the returned data, leaving 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 input schema has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4. The description adds context about the return value, which is already partially covered by the output schema. No additional parameter guidance is needed.

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 the tool shows the current state of the vault, including initialization and specific return fields like total beliefs, verification status, confidence distribution, and routing statistics. It distinguishes from sibling tools like vault_query and vault_write_belief by focusing on overall status rather than individual operations.

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 usage for obtaining a holistic overview of the vault, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention when not to use it. While the sibling tools offer more specific operations, the description lacks direct usage instructions.

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