echopath_consolidate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Deprecate' implies a potentially destructive or irreversible change to a stored memory, but the description never states whether this is reversible, what happens to the underlying run data on consolidation, or what permissions are required.

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?

A single tight sentence with no filler, and the core operation is front-loaded. It is efficient, though the brevity shades into under-specification rather than pure conciseness.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, but for a four-parameter dual-mode mutation tool with zero annotation and zero schema description coverage, the description omits mode selection, parameter roles, and mutation effects — the essentials an agent needs to call it correctly.

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?

All four parameters have 0% schema description coverage, and the description only obliquely hints at them ('recorded GUI run' for run_id, 'memory' for deprecate_path_id). Critically, it never explains that the supplied parameter selects the mode, nor what 'reason' or 'task_intent' are for.

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 names two specific operations — consolidating a recorded GUI run into memory and deprecating a memory — with clear verbs and resources that distinguish it from siblings like echopath_list_memories and echopath_list_runs. However, compressing both modes into one sentence leaves ambiguity about which one is primary and how they relate.

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 choose consolidation versus deprecation, nor any prerequisites, timing, or alternatives relative to the many sibling tools. The agent must infer the selection condition from the parameter names alone.

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