RecallNest

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Explicitly states 'Read-only' (critical safety disclosure) and 'semantic similarity' matching mechanism. However, lacks details on return format, error handling when no matches found, or what constitutes an 'executable skill' structure.

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 total. First states purpose and mechanism, second states usage guideline and safety property. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or waste.

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?

Good coverage for 3-parameter tool with complete schema documentation. Mentions 'executable skills' and 'stored procedure' hinting at return type. Slight gap: no output schema exists and description doesn't detail return structure or skill format.

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 has 100% description coverage, establishing baseline 3. Description aligns with schema (referencing 'task description' matching query param) but adds no additional syntax guidance, examples, or constraints beyond what schema provides.

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?

Clear specific verb ('Retrieve'), resource ('executable skills'), and mechanism ('semantic similarity'). Explicitly contrasts with knowledge recall tools, distinguishing from siblings like search_memory.

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 states when to use ('when you need a stored procedure to act on') and contrasts with alternative ('not just recall knowledge'), effectively differentiating from semantic search tools. Would be 5 if it named specific sibling alternatives.

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