Metis — Consolidate Reflexions Tool

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses idempotency, deduplication, and the 7-day working memory pruning threshold. However, it omits authorization requirements or side effects like potential data loss, though the details given are substantial.

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 extremely concise: two sentences of functional explanation plus one for idempotence. No filler, key information front-loaded. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are covered. The description explains the core transformation (reflexions to semantic nodes, pruning) and key constraints (count threshold, dedup, window). Missing minor details like error states or performance implications, but overall sufficient for a knowledgeable agent.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description explains both parameters: min_count and days are directly referenced in '>= min_count times in the last `days`'. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, though it could be more explicit about default behaviors.

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 verb-resource pair: 'distil recurring reflexion themes into semantic memory' and 'prune working memory'. It uses specific terms like 'min_count' and 'days' to define scope, distinguishing it from sibling consolidation tools like consolidate_old_memories and consolidate_session_memory.

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 states 'Runs the nightly self-improvement consolidation', indicating it's a periodic maintenance task. While it doesn't list when not to use it or alternative tools, the context is clear enough for an agent to infer appropriate scheduling.

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