knowmind_recall_at_time

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail about temporal validity filtering and notes that read scope suffices, going slightly beyond the annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a concrete example of the question it answers and a clear tool-selection guideline. No unnecessary detail.

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?

The description explains the temporal recall behavior and relationship to the current-truth variant, while the schema covers parameter bounds and defaults. It does not describe output format, but no output schema is present and the core usage context is sufficiently covered.

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?

The schema already covers all parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the validity-interval semantics (valid_from <= as_of <= valid_to, or still open), which clarifies how as_of is used beyond the schema description.

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 identifies the verb (recall), resource (memories), and temporal scope (valid at a given instant), and explicitly distinguishes it from the sibling tool knowmind_recall by noting when to use each.

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?

It gives explicit usage direction: 'Use instead of knowmind_recall when the point in time matters; otherwise use knowmind_recall for the current truth.' This directly routes the agent to the correct tool choice.

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