wake_up

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

The description discloses that the tool initializes memory, loads specific layers, returns a compact boot context, and mentions approximate token cost (~600). Without annotations, this provides sufficient behavioral transparency for a non-destructive setup operation.

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?

Two sentences deliver the core action, token cost, layer details, and output type with no redundant information. Front-loaded with the most critical information first.

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 purpose and main behavior but omits details about layers L2 and L3 of the 4-layer stack, and the return value is vaguely described as 'compact boot context' without specifics on structure or content.

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?

The single parameter 'compress' is described with its effect ('Apply n-gram compression to reduce token count') and default value ('default: false'), adding meaningful context beyond the schema's type and description.

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?

Description clearly identifies the tool as initializing a 4-layer memory stack context, specifying what layers L0 and L1 load. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'compress_context' or 'format_with_salience_budget', which serve different purposes.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The context of initialization is implied, but there is no discussion of prerequisites, exclusions, or comparisons to similar memory or context tools among the many siblings.

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