awaken

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses that the tool restores identity, ongoing work, and learned knowledge from previous sessions. However, it omits potential edge cases such as behavior when no previous session exists or whether current session state is overwritten, leaving some ambiguity.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences. The first sentence states the action, the second provides usage timing and specific outcomes. Every word adds value with no redundancy.

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 simple zero-parameter tool without an output schema, the description gives sufficient context: what it does, when to use it, and what it restores. It does not address failure scenarios or interactions with sibling tools, but this is not essential for basic 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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema fully covers this (100% coverage). The description adds context about the tool's purpose but does not need to explain parameters since none exist. Baseline of 4 applies.

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 uses a specific verb 'restore' targeting 'agent identity from previous sessions', making the tool's function unambiguous. It also clarifies the scope by listing what is remembered (identity, ongoing work, learned knowledge). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like 'remember' or 'recall' by framing it as a session-start restoration.

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 explicitly instructs to 'Call at the START of every session', providing clear when-to-use guidance. It does not mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the directive is strong enough to guide an agent.

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