hibernate

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden. It discloses the core behavior (saving state for future restoration) and what data is preserved. However, it does not explain whether calling it overwrites existing saved state, whether it can be called multiple times, or any side effects like ending the session. This is not misleading, but a bit minimal for a state-saving 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?

The description is a single sentence (~25 words) that front-loads the action, states the trigger ('end of every session'), and lists the key content. Every clause earns its place; there is no fluff or 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 3-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers when (end of session), what (session state with three components), and why (preserve for next awakening). It doesn't explain the restore mechanism or potential overwrite behavior, but those are arguably covered by sibling tools and schema. Overall, it is fairly complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explicitly mentioning 'what you were working on, what you learned, and next steps,' directly corresponding to the three parameters (working_on, learnings, next_steps). This reinforces the schema and helps the agent know exactly what to populate.

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 action ('Save current session state') and the resource ('session state') with a specific purpose ('for next awakening'). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'awaken' (which likely restores state) and 'remember' (which may store general memories), making the tool's role 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?

Provides explicit timing: 'Call at the END of every session.' This is strong usage guidance. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., when not to use it), but the end-of-session instruction creates clear context, and the mapping to preservation of work, learnings, and next steps implies appropriate use cases.

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