perseus_recall

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses use of FTS5 keyword + hybrid ranking, and that it returns scored results. Lacks explicit statement that it is read-only, but 'retrieve' implies non-destructive behavior.

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?

Three sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with primary purpose and usage guidance. Efficient and to the point.

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 4 parameters and no output schema, the description explains the tool's purpose, when to use it, ranking mechanism, and that results include scores. Minor gap: could mention result sorting by relevance.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond schema (e.g., 'Uses FTS5 keyword + hybrid ranking' but does not clarify parameter interactions). Baseline 3 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?

Clearly states it retrieves memories from past sessions, with specific use cases and examples. Distinguishes from siblings (remember, forget, reflect, status) by focusing on retrieval.

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 says when to call ('at start of task', when needing project context) and provides example queries. No exclusion criteria, but sibling tools cover different operations, so usage is clear.

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