recall_best_solution

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 the return of the most recent successful lesson with a confidence indicator, explains badge and red indicators for staleness, and notes that recalling resets the confidence clock to 1.0, marking the lesson as recently verified. This is comprehensive behavioral disclosure.

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 concise, with two main sentences plus emoji indicators. It is front-loaded: first sentence states purpose, second gives usage guideline, then additional details. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description explains return values (confidence indicator, badge colors). It covers purpose, usage guidelines, behavioral effects, and provides an example. This is complete for a tool with two parameters and no output schema.

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 with an example usage (recall_best_solution(topic='deploy:web') → returns working deploy command) and mentions partial match for topic, which is also in schema. The example clarifies parameter semantics beyond 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 retrieves the best known solution for a topic from past lessons. It provides specific verb+resource and distinguishes from siblings like recall_at and smart_recall by directing usage before attempting tasks that might have been done before.

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 instructs to call this BEFORE attempting any task that might have been done before, giving clear usage context. While it doesn't list alternatives or when not to use, the overall guidance is strong.

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