vectr_evict_hint

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), description adds that each chunk is re-fetchable with exact vectr_fetch keys, explaining the protocol relationship with vectr_remember. 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?

Four concise sentences with no waste. Front-loaded with purpose, then usage guidance, then protocol context, then limitations. Each sentence adds value.

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 no parameters or output schema, description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, its role in the protocol, and its limitations. Complete for this tool's simplicity.

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?

No parameters (0 params), so schema coverage is 100%. Description adds meaning about return value (list of chunks with re-fetch keys), exceeding baseline of 4 for zero-parameter tools.

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?

Description clearly states 'Lists the code chunks retrieved by THIS session that are safe to drop from context', with verb and specific resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by positioning as the reverse signal in the vectr protocol.

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?

Explicit guidance: 'Use at the exploration → implementation transition, or when context pressure builds.' Also notes it's 'NOT needed on short sessions' and identifies when it's most useful.

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