Erinys Dream

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Run' suggests an operation that may modify memory state, but it discloses nothing about side effects, destructiveness, permissions, or whether collisions mutate or merely report—all critical for an agent choosing among mutation-capable siblings.

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?

One compact sentence with no filler, but the brevity comes at the cost of substance—the jargon is front-loaded without unpacking it.

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?

Return values are covered by the existing output schema, but for an unannotated batch operation with an undocumented parameter, the description leaves out too much: no behavior, no side-effect profile, no when-to-use guidance.

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 coverage is 0% and the single parameter max_collisions is never mentioned in the description. The schema reveals only its type and default of 10, so the meaning of a 'collision', the cost of raising it, and its effect on output remain undocumented.

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?

It names a verb plus resource ('Run Dream Cycle') and the core operation ('batch collision of candidate memory pairs'), but 'Dream Cycle' and 'collision' are unexplained jargon, and the description does not distinguish it from the closely named sibling erinys_collide.

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 statement of when to run this versus erinys_collide, erinys_batch_save, or erinys_distill, no prerequisites, and no note on cost or frequency. The agent must guess from the tool name alone.

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