Recall

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the tool's purpose and that it can be used freely. It does not mention side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or any constraints beyond being a retrieval operation. This is insufficient for a tool with multiple parameters.

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 extremely concise—a single line with a tag and purpose statement. It is front-loaded with the retrieval tag and immediately useful information. No wasted words.

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?

Despite having 5 parameters (1 required) and no output schema, the description provides no context about the feedback mechanism, the 'since' parameter, or the limit parameter. It does not explain the return format or behavior for complex queries. The description is too sparse for the tool's 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?

The schema coverage is 80%, meaning most parameters have descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it only describes the overall purpose. Baseline for high coverage is 3, so no extra credit for parameter insights.

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: to recall, search, find, or look up previous memory, context, or decisions. It uses specific verbs and identifies it as a retrieval operation, distinguishing it from siblings like 'remember' (likely for storage). The tag '[RETRIEVE — use freely, any time]' reinforces its role.

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 description provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use when the user asks to recall, search, find, or look up previous memory, context, or decisions.' It also includes the tag 'use freely, any time,' implying no restrictions. However, it does not mention when not to use or explicitly name alternatives, though sibling tools suggest boundaries.

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