hebbrix_log_decision

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states the effect on confidence but does not disclose idempotency, overwrite behavior, or what happens if outcome is null. Partial disclosure is acceptable but incomplete for a logging tool.

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?

Two dense sentences with no filler. Front-loaded with action and resource, then purpose. Every word contributes.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need not be described. However, 4 parameters with 0% schema coverage mean description should elaborate. Missing guidance on description format or collection_id purpose. Adequate but not thorough.

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%, so description must compensate. It explains 'description' and 'outcome' but not 'collection_id' or 'decision_type'. Lacks details on formatting or allowed values for these parameters. Only partial coverage of parameter meaning.

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?

Description clearly states the tool records a decision and its outcome, with specific verb 'log'. It distinguishes from siblings like hebbrix_remember (general storage) and hebbrix_confidence (query) by noting it feeds confidence. The resource ('decision') and action are unambiguous.

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?

Description implies usage after making a decision and mentions it feeds hebbrix_confidence, but does not explicitly state when not to use or alternatives like hebbrix_remember. Sibling context suggests differentiation, but description lacks direct exclusions.

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