ora_human_introspect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool takes a snapshot (non-destructive) and what information is included. It could mention prerequisites (e.g., human must be active) but the term 'active human' implies that condition.

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?

Single sentence in French that efficiently conveys purpose and usage. No wasted 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?

With no parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently defines the tool's purpose and usage. It lacks details about output format or frequency limitations, but is adequate for initial session context.

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?

Input schema has no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. No additional parameter info is needed. Baseline 4 is appropriate.

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 it provides a snapshot of the active human's mental state (personality, traits, last 5 memories). This is a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like ora_human_remember or ora_human_recall.

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 says 'use at the beginning of each session', giving clear context. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, but the instruction is strong enough for typical use.

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