recall_pilot_notes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the tool returns previously remembered goals in chronological order (oldest first), which is a meaningful behavioral detail. It does not explicitly state read-only behavior, but the name and wording imply it, and no side effects are suggested.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and no redundant details. Every word earns its place.

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 tool with no parameters, no output schema, and none of the complexity of siblings, this description is complete. It explains what is returned, the order, and when to use it, which is sufficient for a simple recall operation.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema covers them fully (100% by absence). The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed. Baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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 recalls previously remembered goals, ordered oldest first. It uses a specific verb ('recall') and resource ('pilot notes'), and the mention of 'what_should_i_do_tonight' in usage distinguishes it from that sibling.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: call at the start of a session or alongside what_should_i_do_tonight to resume context and steer coaching. This gives clear when-to-use context and implies an alternative, satisfying the usage guideline requirement.

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