Metis — Assemble Brainstorm Context

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

Mentions 8000 char limit per source and returns assembled string with source labels, but does not explain what 'recent content' means, behavior when sources are empty, or default behavior when date_filters is null. With no annotations, more detail would improve transparency.

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?

Concise and well-structured: one sentence for purpose, then clear details on char limit and output, then arg descriptions in docstring style. No unnecessary words.

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 two params, no annotations, and an output schema, the description covers essential aspects: sources, char limit, date filters example. However, it lacks definition of 'recent' and default filtering behavior, which slightly reduces completeness.

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 0%, so description compensates well by explaining that sources is a list from a set of allowed values (library, meetings, news, ideas, journal) and that date_filters is an optional dict with source-specific date filters, including an example. Adds significant meaning beyond the schema structure.

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 the verb 'assemble' and the resource 'context from multiple sources for brainstorming'. Distinguishes from sibling tools like brainstorm_turn or get_brainstorm_session by focusing on gathering context from specific sources.

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?

Implies usage for brainstorming context assembly but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives like load_project_context or get_agent_context. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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