vault_read

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

The annotation declares readOnlyHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds behavioral context by separating actions, noting that list_captures sorts newest first, and providing defaults for limit and include_content. It does not discuss errors or permissions, but the read-only nature is well established.

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 compact and well-structured, presenting a brief overview followed by a clear action list with parameters. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant or vague filler.

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?

All 8 parameters are accounted for across the three actions, and the output schema supplements return-value expectations. Minor gaps exist, such as not explicitly noting that 'action' is required or detailing edge-case behavior, but for a read-only composite tool this is largely complete.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description fully compensates by mapping each parameter to its relevant action: query/directory/tags for search, path for get, and status (with enum values), limit (default 50), and include_content (default False) for list_captures. This provides complete semantic understanding beyond the bare schema.

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 opens with 'Read and search vault content,' clearly identifying the tool's function. It then lists three distinct actions (search, get, list_captures) with specific verbs and resources, distinguishing it from write-oriented sibling tools like vault_capture and vault_promote.

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?

Action descriptions such as 'Search vault notes' and 'Read a single file's full content' provide clear context on when to use each mode. However, it does not explicitly compare with sibling tools or state when not to use this tool (e.g., for writing), so it falls short of a 5.

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