velixar_distill

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full weight. It discloses key behaviors: duplicate detection (skips near-identical content), contradiction flagging, and preview mode. It does not explain output format, durability guarantees, or error handling, but the core behavioral traits are well covered.

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 three sentences long, with the purpose stated in the first sentence. Every sentence adds unique value: usage timing, duplicate/contradiction handling, and preview option. No extraneous 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?

The description covers usage, duplicate detection, and preview mode fairly well, but lacks details on return values (e.g., what is returned when storing vs. preview), error cases, and storage limits. Given no output schema, some return information would be beneficial for complete understanding.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond schema by explaining that tags can be auto-generated ('auto-generated if absent') and clarifying the effect of preview mode ('return extracted memories without storing'). This additional context improves parameter understanding.

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 'Extract durable memories from session content', specifying the verb (extract) and resource (durable memories from session content). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like velixar_store (which stores arbitrary data) and velixar_consolidate (which merges memories) by focusing on extraction and duplicate detection.

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 defines when to use the tool: 'at natural memory-worthy breakpoints: task complete, decision made, bug solved, preference clarified.' It also mentions using preview mode for dry runs. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide direct comparisons to alternatives.

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