recall

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses that recall returns either a comprehensive set of information about an entity or a profile digest with recurring people, themes, mood patterns, and open commitments. However, it does not explain the effect of the 'limit' parameter or any potential side effects.

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 three sentences, relatively concise, but the first sentence ('Turn the diary into living memory of the person') is poetic and does not convey precise tool behavior. It could be omitted without loss of clarity.

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 absence of output schema and annotations, the description should cover output format and pagination. While it describes the two output modes, it omits details on how the 'limit' parameter affects results and the structure of returned data (e.g., text, JSON).

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?

The schema already describes the 'about' parameter as 'A person, place, project, or topic to recall. Omit for a whole-life profile digest.' The description repeats this without adding new semantics. The 'limit' parameter lacks any description in both schema and tool description, leaving its purpose unclear.

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 retrieves 'everything the diary knows about a person/place/topic across time' or a profile digest. While the opening line is metaphorical, the subsequent sentences provide a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from siblings like get_day or search.

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 explains two usage modes (with or without the 'about' parameter) but does not explicitly compare to sibling tools or state when to prefer recall over search, reflect, or weekly_digest. The guidance is internal only.

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