erinys_session_summary

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Save', which implies a write operation, but does not disclose whether this overwrites an existing summary, requires an active session, what happens with the optional session_id, or any side effects. This lack of detail is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation safety nets.

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, well-structured sentence that is front-loaded with a clear verb and object, followed by a parenthetical with the expected content structure. Every word earns its place, with no filler or repetition.

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?

For a tool with 3 parameters and no annotations, the description leaves out critical context: the meaning of 'project' and 'session_id', whether the operation is idempotent, and any prerequisites. The output schema exists but is not shown in the description, so the return behavior is also undisclosed. This makes the description incomplete for a reliable tool invocation.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides some semantic value by indicating what 'content' should include (Goal/Discoveries/Accomplished), but it leaves 'project' and 'session_id' completely unexplained. With three parameters, the description only partially clarifies one, which is insufficient.

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 states the tool's purpose: 'Save comprehensive end-of-session summary' with a specific verb ('Save') and resource ('end-of-session summary'), and it even specifies the expected content structure (Goal/Discoveries/Accomplished). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like erinys_save and erinys_session_start/end.

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 phrase 'end-of-session' implies this tool is for use at the conclusion of a session, providing some contextual guidance. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare it to alternatives such as erinys_save or erinys_session_end, leaving the selection decision partially to inference.

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