Erinys Context

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not indicate what 'context' actually contains, what the default limit of 20 means for truncation, whether results are ordered or paginated, or what the intended_use parameter changes — even though 'recent' hints at recency ordering, that is not stated.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, so nothing is wasted. But the brevity is under-specification rather than efficiency, given three undocumented parameters and a meaningless default for intended_use.

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-value explanation is not required. Still, for a tool with no annotations and 0% parameter coverage, the description should explain the semantics of 'session context', the limit behavior, and intended_use — none of which are covered.

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 largely does not. It implies 'project' is the scope but says nothing about 'limit' (default 20) or the opaque 'intended_use' parameter (default 'context'), which is the most ambiguous field and gets no explanation at all.

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 names a verb ('Get') and a resource ('recent session context') scoped to a project, which is more than a restatement of the name. However, with siblings like erinys_session_summary, erinys_recall, and erinys_timeline, 'session context' is not clearly distinguished from a summary or a timeline, so an agent cannot confidently pick this tool over those.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus erinys_session_summary, erinys_recall, or erinys_timeline, and no stated preconditions (e.g. must a session be started first via erinys_session_start?). The agent must infer the routing decision entirely.

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