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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a meaningful behavioral constraint not present in annotations: 'Avoid exposing hidden/private fields unless the platform scopes allow them.' This is valuable context about privacy handling.

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?

Two sentences with no waste: the first states the purpose, the second gives a critical safety note. The main verb and resource are front-loaded, and every word earns its place.

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 read-only tool with 3 optional parameters and no output schema, the description gives the purpose and a safety caveat but lacks guidance on parameter selection or return value expectations. It is minimally viable but leaves gaps that could cause incorrect usage.

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 description coverage is only 33% (only 'query' has a description), and the tool description adds no parameter-level meaning. It does not explain the relationship between contactId and query, nor what 'limit' controls. With low coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 states a clear verb ('Summarize') and resource ('what matters before the user speaks with someone'), giving a specific purpose. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like search_memory or get_today, but the 'before the user speaks with someone' context provides enough distinct meaning.

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?

The description implies when to use it ('before the user speaks with someone') but does not mention alternatives or exclusions. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over sibling tools, leaving some inference to the agent.

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