infer_lesson_from_history

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

Description states the tool will 'record' a rule, implying a write operation, but annotations declare readOnlyHint=true. This is a direct contradiction, violating behavioral transparency.

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 wasted words. It efficiently conveys the primary action, though it lacks structural elements like usage notes or parameter hints.

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 nested objects and no output schema, the description omits critical details: what 'lastAction' represents, expected output format, or how to interpret results. It is insufficient for correct 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no explanation of the parameters ('chatHistory', 'lastAction') or their roles. The agent cannot understand how to construct valid input from the description alone.

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: infer from chat history why a failure occurred and record a rule. It uses specific verbs and resources, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'search_lessons' or 'retrieve_lessons'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or context for invocation, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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