dream_patterns

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 discloses that the tool aggregates data across all entries and that output quality depends on input volume, which are useful behavioral traits. However, it doesn't mention performance characteristics, error conditions, or specific output format details, leaving some gaps in 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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by elaboration in two concise sentences. Every sentence adds value by explaining scope, aggregation details, and data dependency, with zero wasted words or repetition.

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 tool has 0 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema exists, the description provides sufficient context for understanding its purpose and usage. It covers what the tool does and how input volume affects results, though it could briefly hint at output structure to fully leverage the output schema.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately focuses on the tool's function without redundant parameter info, earning a high baseline score for not introducing unnecessary complexity.

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's purpose with specific verbs ('Analyze recurring patterns', 'Aggregates symbols, emotions, and themes') and resources ('all Dream Capture entries', 'DC pages'). It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on pattern analysis rather than upload, export, search, or other operations.

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 usage context by stating 'The more DC pages you upload, the more meaningful the patterns become,' suggesting it's best used with substantial data. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_stats' or 'find_connections,' nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites.

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