kira_personal_brief

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds valuable behavioral context: 'Personal scars are LOCAL-ONLY — this reads them from disk and never touches the network.' It also describes return format (top-N by recency, most recent first, with mistake and alternative).

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?

Three dense, information-rich sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 two simple optional parameters and no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns and under what conditions. No gaps.

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%, but the description adds extra context: 'Pass 'limit' to change how many, and 'contexts' to keep only scars relevant to the current project.' It clarifies that untagged scars are always kept, which is not in the schema.

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: 'Surface your most recent PERSONAL scars.' It specifies the resource (personal failure notes), the action (surface), and the source (local-only disk). It distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing local-only nature and connection to kira_record_failure.

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 advises when to use: 'Call this at the START of a session (ideally from a SessionStart hook).' This is strong, actionable guidance. It also implicitly differentiates by noting it reads local data never touching network, contrasting with other tools that might access remote data.

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