vectr_map_save

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description aligns, stating the call is a no-op if a passport already exists. It also adds details like token length guidelines and that overwrite=true replaces the existing summary.

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 (~4 sentences) and front-loaded with purpose and conditions. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description covers all essential aspects: when to use, what to write, behavior on existing passport, and overwrite option. No gaps remain.

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?

Beyond schema descriptions, the description adds critical guidance: what to write in the summary (codebase purpose, tech stack, modules, etc.) and a token range (200-350). This significantly helps the agent craft the correct input.

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: saving a synthesized codebase summary as a permanent passport. It distinguishes this from siblings by specifying it should be called only after vectr_map returns raw metadata, not when a saved summary already exists.

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 usage conditions: 'Call this ONLY after vectr_map returned raw metadata — i.e. on your first visit to a codebase. NOT when vectr_map already returned a saved summary.' Also explains no-op behavior and the overwrite parameter.

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