Metis — Recall Decisions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It mentions that an empty category returns all categories, which is a useful behavioral detail. However, it does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, any required permissions, or what the response contains beyond the output schema.

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 short and front-loaded: it states the purpose, then usage context, then parameter descriptions. Every sentence is necessary, no wasted 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 that an output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers purpose, usage, and parameters adequately. However, it could mention that it returns only user-recorded decisions, which is implied but not explicit.

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 0%, but the description fully explains both parameters: category ('filter to one category, or \'\' for all') and limit ('max rows'). This adds essential meaning beyond the schema's type and default values.

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 that the tool recalls recorded preferences/decisions for personalization, using the specific verb 'recall' and resource 'preferences/decisions'. It also notes it is called during context assembly, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'remember' or 'write_user_preferences'.

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 says when to use: 'during context assembly (and any time Metis is about to act in a way a preference might govern)'. It does not provide exclusions or alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide.

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