wake_up

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the return format ('flat Markdown') but does not disclose whether the tool modifies state, requires authentication, has side effects, or triggers any mutations. 'Wake-up' suggests activation but is vague.

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 very short (one sentence plus return note) and front-loaded with the action and key components. Every piece of information is essential, though jargon like 'L0 profile' could be clarified.

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 tool with 4 parameters, no output schema, and complex multi-layered functionality (profile, diary, semantic search, CBT defusion), the description is too sparse. It fails to explain how the layers combine, what CBT defusion entails, or the format of the returned Markdown, leaving the agent under-informed.

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 input schema provides 100% parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add new meaning beyond what the schema already conveys (e.g., the schema already defines 'context_depth' with enum choices). It mentions 'L2 semantic search' but does not elaborate on how parameters interact.

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 specifies the verb 'wake-up' and lists the resources involved (L0 profile, L1 diary, L2 semantic search) and the return format (flat Markdown). It distinguishes from sibling 'search' by including CBT defusion and multi-layer context.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'search', 'memorize', or 'search_embedding_recommendations'. The description does not indicate prerequisites, use cases, or exclusions.

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