erinys_recall

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only says 'recall', which suggests a read operation, but does not clarify side effects, return format, or whether it is read-only. No contradiction with annotations exists since there are none.

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 a single sentence with no fluff, making it structurally concise. However, it is so terse that it borders on under-specification rather than effective conciseness, as it omits critical operational details.

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?

The tool has three parameters, an output schema, and no annotations, yet the description offers no context about how 'recent' is defined, how parameters influence results, or what the output contains. It is wholly inadequate for a tool of this complexity.

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%, and the description gives no information about the three parameters (limit, project, intended_use). It does not compensate for the schema's lack of descriptions, leaving parameter semantics completely ambiguous.

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 specifies the action ('Recall') and the object ('recent observations'), and indicates the purpose ('for context'). It is a specific verb-resource statement, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like erinys_context or erinys_search.

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 alternatives such as erinys_search or erinys_get. The phrase 'for context' implies a use case, but there are no explicit instructions, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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