timeline_story_threads

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the agent knows it's a safe read operation. The description adds valuable context about the structure of the output (three lenses, motif chips, etc.), which goes beyond annotations.

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, well-crafted sentence with no filler. Front-loaded key concept (curated narrative arcs). Every word adds value.

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 lists the components (motifs, anchors, reports, prompts) but does not explain the output format (e.g., returns a list or single object). No mention of pagination or result size. Adequate but not comprehensive for a retrieval tool with multiple optional filters.

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?

Both parameters are fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description explains the 'three ways' which directly informs the lens parameter's purpose. The id parameter example ('machine-silence-calibration') provides concrete guidance.

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 curated narrative arcs with three lenses and multiple components. It distinguishes from sibling tools like timeline_events (events) and timeline_motif_map (motifs) by combining these aspects, but could be more explicit when to use this vs. timeline_agent_manifest.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., timeline_compare_sources, timeline_deepen_story). No when-not-to-use or prerequisites mentioned.

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