timps_context_briefing

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the output format (3-sentence briefing) and content areas, but doesn't mention whether it reads from persistent storage, whether it modifies state, or any side effects. The 'refresh' parameter hints at caching behavior but isn't fully explained.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, includes usage trigger phrases, and zero wasted words. The description is compact and immediately actionable.

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?

For a simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is quite complete. It explains what the tool does, what it returns, and when to use it. The only minor gap is not explaining the caching mechanism or what happens if no context exists, but given the tool's simplicity, this is adequate.

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 100% for the single parameter (refresh), and the description adds context by explaining the default behavior ('default: false') and purpose ('Force refresh even if cache is fresh'). However, the description doesn't elaborate on when refresh would be needed or what 'cache is fresh' means, but the schema already covers the parameter well.

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 tool's purpose: 'Get a 3-sentence resumption briefing from the Context Keeper' with specific content (what you were working on, current state, recommended next step). It distinguishes itself from siblings like timps_context_switcher and timps_full_checkup by focusing on resumption briefing.

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 states when to use: 'Use when the user says "what was I doing" or "catch me up"'. This provides clear trigger phrases and implies it's for resuming work, distinguishing it from other context-related tools.

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