vectr_revoke

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

Annotations show destructiveHint=false and idempotentHint=true; description adds crucial behavioral context: note stays visible with deterrent framing, content replaced, reversible. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Description is front-loaded with purpose, then usage guidance, then alternatives. Every sentence earns its place; no fluff. Efficiently structured for agent comprehension.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, description fully explains behavioral effects (deterrent display, content change), reversibility, and how it differs from siblings. Complete and self-contained.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and both parameters are already well-described in the schema (reason shown verbatim, note_id from recall). The description does not add new information beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score applies.

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?

Clearly states the tool flags a note as WRONG without deleting it, distinguishing it from vectr_forget (erases) and vectr_remember (prefer when writing correction). Verb and resource are explicit.

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?

Explicitly says use when 'you've confirmed a prior finding no longer holds' and advises preferring vectr_remember when recording a correction. Also mentions reversibility with vectr_reinstate, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use.

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