get_vector_from_hash

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and discloses key behaviors: retrieval, binary blob conversion, return of a list of floats or error. It does not cover edge cases (missing key or field), but overall provides adequate transparency for a simple read operation.

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 very concise, using three sentences for purpose, parameters, and return. It avoids fluff and is easy to scan, though the Args section could be formatted more clearly.

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 simple tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential: what it does, parameters, return type. It could mention that the hash must contain a vector stored by a companion tool, but is otherwise 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?

The description adds meaning beyond the input schema by explaining that 'name' is the Redis hash key and 'vector_field' is the field name with a default. Since schema coverage is 0%, this is valuable context for correct usage.

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's purpose: 'Retrieve a vector from a Redis hash and convert it back from binary blob.' This includes a specific verb (Retrieve), resource (vector from Redis hash), and conversion action, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get, hget, or set_vector_in_hash.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only mentions using the default field name unless specifically required, but does not explain context, prerequisites, or scenarios where other tools like hget or vector_search_hash would be more appropriate.

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