reflect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the output (patterns, progress, etc.) but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or has any side effects. The description is adequate but lacks full transparency.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by usage guidance. There is no redundancy or wasted words.

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?

The description explains the return content (patterns, progress, etc.) but does not specify format or structure. Given no output schema, this is acceptable. The tool has 2 optional parameters, and the description covers the key use cases. It lacks explicit differentiation from siblings but is sufficient for its simplicity.

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 50% (only 'end' is described). The description adds context by mentioning 'over the last week or month,' which explains the 'period' parameter implicitly. This adds meaning beyond the schema, compensating for the missing description in the schema.

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 'Get reflection material', specifying the verb and resource. It details the content: patterns, progress, open loops, and on-this-day memories. The scope 'over the last week or month' distinguishes it from sibling tools like weekly_digest and on_this_day.

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 explicitly says 'Use for a daily check-in or weekly recap so the diary feels alive', providing clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not mention when not to use it or provide explicit alternatives to sibling tools.

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