sleep

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

Without annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it is idempotent, cheap, a no-op until something is ripe, never edits raw text, consolidates near-duplicate clusters, and manages memory budget. It lacks explicit mention of any side effects beyond the described operations, but the 'idempotent' and 'no-op' qualifiers provide sufficient 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 relatively long but structured with clear sentences. It front-loads the core purpose ('SLEEP-TIME COMPUTE') and provides detailed context. However, it includes technical jargon ('ripe near-duplicate clusters', 'preference-flip handling') that could be streamlined, making it less concise than ideal.

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 no output schema, the description covers the tool's functionality comprehensively, including its safety profile and relationship to other tools. It lacks explanation of the 'cluster_threshold' parameter and does not state return values, but otherwise provides sufficient context for an AI agent to use the tool correctly.

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% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'keep' parameter ('if keep is given (or a capacity was configured), prunes/re-affirms the memory budget') but does not mention the 'cluster_threshold' parameter at all, leaving one of two parameters undefined.

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 defines the tool's purpose: background memory maintenance during idle time, explicitly distinguishing it from sibling tools like consolidate and consolidate_clusters by stating it is the 'recommended place to do heavy cleanup so remember()/recall() stay fast.' It uses specific verbs like 'consolidates', 'prunes', and 're-affirms', making the action clear.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use the tool ('whenever the agent is IDLE') and reassures safety ('safe to call on every idle tick; a second immediate call does no new work'). It also implies when not to use it (not for editing raw text), but does not directly contrast with every sibling tool for exclusion.

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