ora_recall_decisions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It implies a read-only search operation ('Recherche'), which is clear. However, it does not disclose details like result format, pagination, authentication needs, or potential side effects, though for a search tool the behavior is mostly transparent.

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 only two short sentences in French, with no unnecessary words. It is succinct and entirely appropriate for the tool's 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?

The description covers the basic purpose but lacks information about the return value (no output schema), pagination behavior, or limitations. For a simple search tool with well-documented parameters, it is adequate but not fully complete.

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%, so all parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter-level details beyond the overall purpose, meeting the baseline of 3.

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 searches past decisions ('Recherche dans les decisions passees') to find why a technical choice was made. It provides a specific verb and resource, and implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like ora_search or ora_human_recall by focusing on decisions. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself.

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 says 'Utilise pour retrouver pourquoi un choix technique a ete fait', giving a clear context of use. However, it offers no guidance on when not to use this tool, prerequisites, or alternatives among the many sibling tools.

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