recall_best_solution

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

No annotations are provided, so description bears full burden. It discloses that recalling resets the confidence clock to 1.0 and explains the badge indicators for staleness. Additional behavioral context like partial match support is given.

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 4 sentences plus an example, well-structured with the key action first. It is efficient but could be slightly tighter; the example could be integrated into the main text.

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?

For a 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage timing, return structure (confidence indicator, badges), and a side effect (reset). It does not mention fallback behavior when no lesson exists, but is otherwise 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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions. Description adds value by providing an example (topic='deploy:web') and explaining the return value structure. This extra context goes 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 verb 'Recall' and resource 'best known solution for a topic from past lessons'. An example is provided. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like recall_context or smart_recall, which also retrieve past information.

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 calling this tool before attempting a task that might have been done before. Provides confidence indicators with badges for staleness. Lacks explicit exclusions or comparisons to alternatives, but the usage directive is clear.

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