fetch_summary

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose useful behavior: the since_hours window is applied against end_ts, and defaults of 24h and 5 summaries are stated. It omits permissions, ordering of results, and any note on whether summaries are per-project only or also per-agent.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in a single sentence, followed by a scannable parameter block. The parameter block largely restates the schema, which is redundant when the schema is visible, but it is compact and well ordered.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. What is missing is the relationship to the sibling summarizers: an agent cannot tell from this text whether fetch_summary retrieves summaries produced by summarize_recent/summarize_thread or some independently stored artifact, which matters for calling it 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does document all four parameters: project_key as identifier, since_hours as an end_ts window with a 24h default, limit as a max count with a 5 default, and format as the output format. The only weak spot is 'format', whose accepted values are never enumerated.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Retrieve stored project-wide summaries'), which separates it from the generative siblings summarize_thread and summarize_recent by the word 'stored'. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so the distinction must be inferred rather than read.

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?

Usage is only implied: 'stored' hints that this reads previously generated summaries rather than producing new ones, but the description never states when to prefer this over summarize_recent, summarize_thread, or fetch_inbox. No prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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