aion_query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses the API endpoint (port 3003), the injection of full memory context, and the automatic fallback to a direct Ollama query without memory if offline. This is valuable behavioral context, though it does not describe the exact response format.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and followed by the fallback behavior. Every sentence adds necessary information with no redundancy or irrelevant details.

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 simple one-parameter tool without an output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it does, the memory injection, and the fallback. It does not detail the response structure beyond the memory hint, but given the simplicity, it is reasonably complete. A brief note on response format would elevate it.

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 input schema already fully describes the single 'message' parameter. The description's phrase 'send a message' reiterates the schema but adds no additional parameter constraints or formatting details. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 sends a message to AION via its public REST API on port 3003, with specific mention of memory context injection. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like aion_api_chat or ollama_query, but the fallback behavior and memory context provide implicit distinction.

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 implies usage when one desires AION with memory context and mentions automatic fallback if offline. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives like ollama_query, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites. Usage context is present but not fully explicit.

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