crbro_boot

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It states what happens on first use (initializes), what happens on subsequent uses (loads memory), and the consequence of skipping (context loss). This goes beyond a simple 'boot' verb and gives the agent a clear mental model of the tool's side effects.

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 front-loaded with the mandatory warning, then explains the tool's function, then explains the first-use vs subsequent-use behavior, and ends with a consequence. Every sentence contributes unique value without 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?

Given the tool has no parameters and no output schema, all necessary information is covered: what it does, when to call it, what to expect on first vs later calls, and why it matters. The description fully prepares an agent to invoke this tool 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?

The input schema has zero properties, so there are no parameters to document. The description appropriately does not dwell on parameters, and the absence of parameters means the baseline of 4 is appropriate.

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 identifies the tool as a mandatory boot action that loads persistent memory from previous sessions, distinguishing it from sibling tools like crbro_status or crbro_recall which serve different purposes. The verb 'boot' plus the explicit consequence of skipping ('losing all accumulated context') makes the purpose 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?

Explicitly instructs to call this as the very first action in every new conversation and before any other work, providing strong when-to-use guidance. It also clarifies that on first use it initializes the brain structure, and on subsequent uses it loads hot topics and context, giving a complete usage scenario.

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